Wizardly Questions: Round 2

[Side]

So I've been playing my wizard a fair bit and have been having a good bit of fun. I've stayed on track for a transmutation focused build after the last set of questions I asked, but I decided to do a bit of experimenting. Everyone on here always talks about how summons can do most of the fighting for a wizard, and I've never really been a summoner, only a blaster or a polymorph/shapechange kind of guy.

That said now that I've tried using a fully buffed summon and am able to handle areas four CR levels beyond my actual level with virtually no risk I'm very interested. Interested enough that I'm already looking into another RCR. I'm not sure I'll go through with it, as I still want to give transmutation a fair shake, but the idea is already in my head.

I'm considering changing my build to a wizard/frost mage/thaumaturgist/archmage, instead of the current wizard/frost mage/arcane scholar/archmage with a change in feats from epic spell focus transmutation to beckon the frozen with another epic spell.

So, just how effective is an arcane summoner? I absolutely love the idea of it, but it also feels like I'm putting all my eggs in one basket. DC and damage spells are not necessarily countered by a single spell like summons are.

Additionally how good is an arcane summoner without thaumaturgist? I can easily fit beckon the frozen and still get epic spell focus transmutation if I don't go for this class. If I had one more feat, or if I was willing to spend an epic feat slot on a non-epic feat, I'd be able to go for both, but I don't think that's a good idea (even though I could sacrifice the slot I'm saving for an epic spell).

I've read a little bit about thaumaturgist, and while I'm not too concerned about having multiple summons there were some posts about other problems, like class abilities not applying properly, and I didn't see anything about these problems being resolved. Is the class working correctly at the moment?

As usual any and all advice is welcome.

[Invoker]

The Thaumaturgist (if it works well again...) is a very good class, but not necessary to make good use of summons. If you have an RP concept in mind, go ahead. But mechanical reasons should not push you to this RCR.

Said this, I am curious: why would you want to specialize as Transmuter (which is a rather unique type of DC caster, with a big advantage and a few drawbacks) when you picked classes like ASoC and Frost Mage that get in the way of your DC?

[Side]

Frost Mage, alongside transmutation, are there partly because I like them and partly because I like the RP side of each. They compliment each other fairly well in my head, even if they don't interact at all from a mechanical standpoint. I don't really need more than 5 levels in it to fit the character concept though. I don't have to go for the cold penetration feat at 10, even though I've been grabbing it anyway.

Arcane Scholar is mostly there because, alongside frost mage, I like the idea of an empowered polar ray. That's honestly the entire reason it's there. This is my first wizard that I'm putting any real investment toward DCs, and with my lack of knowledge it seems like transmutation could benefit from a bit of blaster and a bit of DC. Disintegrate is kind of a mix of the two already, so why not add a very blaster focused class to my DC build? I haven't really hit a level where I can tell if this is a good idea or not.

So I guess to answer your question as simply as possible it's a mix of preferred flavor and lack of experience.

The RCR as a whole would be to add beckon the frozen back in. I had it a long time ago but never made use of it due to never summoning things, but now that I've given summoning a decent try at a decent level I like the idea of having it back. It fits my character pretty well I think. Switching Arcane Scholar for Thaumaturgist is more of a "well I'm already here, might as well" sort of thing, particularly if the class works properly and is good.

I should mention (forgot to in the last thread) that the character is a deep imaskari. I don't have access to Red Wizard, which would be the next addition for a full DC focus in my mind, and I don't really know how else to assist with a DC build while also maintaining the bits of flavor I've come to enjoy.

[Invoker]

Frost Mage, alongside transmutation, are there partly because I like them and partly because I like the RP side of each. They compliment each other fairly well in my head, even if they don't interact at all from a mechanical standpoint. I don't really need more than 5 levels in it to fit the character concept though. I don't have to go for the cold penetration feat at 10, even though I've been grabbing it anyway.

In for a penny, in for a pound.

If you take Frost Mage, go all the way. Good choice.

Arcane Scholar is mostly there because, alongside frost mage, I like the idea of an empowered polar ray. That's honestly the entire reason it's there. This is my first wizard that I'm putting any real investment toward DCs, and with my lack of knowledge it seems like transmutation could benefit from a bit of blaster and a bit of DC. Disintegrate is kind of a mix of the two already, so why not add a very blaster focused class to my DC build? I haven't really hit a level where I can tell if this is a good idea or not.

It's rather bad to play Frost Mage without Improved Empowered Metamagic, so that's pretty congruous. The thing with DC wizards is, the more you deviate from the DC path (as in, trying to cram in stuff like FM and ASoC), the better wizard you need to be to make it work. You'll see what I mean later on, when in PvE you'll need to know every single enemy's saves, and in event you'll need to learn to "probe" opponents and calculate on the fly while the crap rains down on you. Totally possible, but things like server lag tend to really get in the way of it.

The misfortune in this approach is that you are a Transmutation specialist: since your main spell is Flesh to Stone and has a naturally low DC because it belongs to the 6th Circle, you tend to want to focus MORE on raising DC, rather than less. As for Disintegrate, it's actually a full blasting spell: only, instead of halving the damage like classic Evocation spells for instance, a successful save basically entirely negates it. Disintegrate's advantages are evident, though: high damage, excellent vs Constructs (which are generally difficult foes for wizards, although not for Frost Mages...), and the corpse disintegration means some cool stuff like killing Trolls on the spot, for instance.

But I digress.

So I guess to answer your question as simply as possible it's a mix of preferred flavor and lack of experience.

Always go with flavor. Always.

The RCR as a whole would be to add beckon the frozen back in. I had it a long time ago but never made use of it due to never summoning things, but now that I've given summoning a decent try at a decent level I like the idea of having it back. It fits my character pretty well I think. Switching Arcane Scholar for Thaumaturgist is more of a "well I'm already here, might as well" sort of thing, particularly if the class works properly and is good.

Doing so, however, devalues your Frost Mage investment quite a bit. Be mindful not to end up with a pretty bad character in the process of adding flavor...think it through, and when you're convinced, go for it. Or PM me.

I should mention (forgot to in the last thread) that the character is a deep imaskari. I don't have access to Red Wizard, which would be the next addition for a full DC focus in my mind, and I don't really know how else to assist with a DC build while also maintaining the bits of flavor I've come to enjoy.

A simple way to supplement DC to a wizard without altering its flavor is to actually reduce the PrC investment, and get 5 wizard levels in the epics. The reason is, DC Wizards are advised to begin with Spellcasting Prodigy, max INT, full INT progression and add as many Gr. INT as they can in the epics.

Other more colorful ways are adding Shadow Adept (not with Frost Mage, though, for the love of God...that's catastrophic...), Blood Magus (at least till you get Bloodseeking Spell at lvl 6) and/or Archmage (Spell Power I-III, depending on your standing CL).

Your ideal DC wizard should have some 30-32+ INT, CL 32+ (at least offensively) and an Epic Spell Focus in the chosen school.

You can work with less, of course. Consider that simply a "good", reliable standard.

[Side]

Well the current build is on track for 30 INT before buffs, 33 CL with Archmage, and Epic Spell Focus Transmutation, even with Arcane Scholar and Frost Mage. Because of the tight feat requirements I missed out on Spellcasting Prodigy.

For some reason I completely missed the fact that Thaumaturgist gets Augment Summoning for free. With that taken properly into account I can get the same stuff, including the focus into Transmutation, alongside Thaumaturgist. Plus if I go this route I don't have as great of a need for the last 5 Frost Mage levels, giving me an extra feat in epics.

I guess now's the time to think about which class would be a better fit for my character, Arcane Scholar (damage/metamagic flexibility) or Thaumaturgist (summons).

Thanks for the help.

[Invoker]

Well the current build is on track for 30 INT before buffs, 33 CL with Archmage, and Epic Spell Focus Transmutation, even with Arcane Scholar and Frost Mage. Because of the tight feat requirements I missed out on Spellcasting Prodigy.

Missing Prodigy's a real pity. But those numbers still look good enough, so never mind...acceptable losses.

Arcane Scholar takes care of the metamagic. If you manage the Spell Focus Feats, you're ok.

I guess now's the time to think about which class would be a better fit for my character, Arcane Scholar (damage/metamagic flexibility) or Thaumaturgist (summons).

You only ever need three metamagic feats if you are NOT a Frost Mage. If you ARE a Frost Mage, Improved Empowered Spell is almost mandatory. In any case, if you play well, you'll always be at least viable.

Thanks for the help.

My pleasure. Have fun!

[chad878262]

The nice thing about using summons is that regardless of your build you essentially always have something there as a safety net, namely, let the enemies focus on your summon and if it get's dispelled/immediately starts getting mauled you know you probably should be dimension dooring the heck out of there!

I'm currently playing a fairly low CL gish type with stealth in the UD and I use my undead summon so that if a wight comes along and dispels it I have time to get away before being dispelled and mobbed by the sometimes half dozen other undead that spawn with the wight.

You should listen to everything Invoker says, he's helped me with countless wizards and other builds, but the most important thing I've learned from him (IMO) is just as he told you.

Always go with flavor. Always.

What this means, in my opinion, is that you should not build just for power, you should build for flavor and then optimize your class/feat/skill/ability set up in order to maximize what you can do while realizing the RP concept you have in mind. In other words, it's perfectly fine (I'd say it's nearly required to make things fun) to make a build with weaknesses or which is sub optimal, so long as you understand the weaknesses inherent to your build and either do what is needed to mitigate those weaknesses or live to play within your constraints. Where people run in to trouble often times is in not understanding the weaknesses inherent to their build choices and then getting frustrated that they are not as efficient/powerful/whatever as they want to be.

So you know your class split is not ideal in that you have some Blaster classes with some DC build choices. That's perfectly fine, if nothing else maybe fewer enemies save vs. your AoE spells when you use them (but then if you are focused in Transmutation, that doesn't really improve your AoE/evocations DC's). It sounds like you are willing to learn about where your build is weak which is very good. Whether you want to RCR or not is up to you, but if so all I can say is focusing on blaster classes and trying to be a DC wizard is mostly going to frustrate you, unless you go in understanding stuff is going to save more than 1/2 the time in epics and you'll end up relying on blasting, probably wishing you had taken more blaster focused feats...

[Side]

You only ever need three metamagic feats if you are NOT a Frost Mage. If you ARE a Frost Mage, Improved Empowered Spell is almost mandatory. In any case, if you play well, you'll always be at least viable.

I'll be honest, in past builds without Arcane Scholar I only ever took Extend Spell. I take it you're referring to Empower and Maximize?

In case you are, just how much "need" do you mean when you say "need"? When I said I could fit those numbers into my build regardless of the fourth class I was not really taking metamagic feats into account beyond Extend.

What this means, in my opinion, is that you should not build just for power, you should build for flavor and then optimize your class/feat/skill/ability set up in order to maximize what you can do while realizing the RP concept you have in mind. In other words, it's perfectly fine (I'd say it's nearly required to make things fun) to make a build with weaknesses or which is sub optimal, so long as you understand the weaknesses inherent to your build and either do what is needed to mitigate those weaknesses or live to play within your constraints.

I couldn't agree more. When it comes to characters I have a falchion wm/fb who is maxing dexterity instead of strength, a constitution bard that can't hit the broad side of a barn, and now a DC wizard that uses blaster PRCs. Not the greatest, but so far the variety and RP power have been more than worth the mechanical power loss.

Usually I handle the weaknesses and flavor outside of these threads, and just use the threads to make sure I understand the mechanics of what I'm dealing with. Magic classes that don't just buff up and smack things are a bit beyond me still, but I'm learning as best I can!

Maybe one day I'll manage to play a character who's flavor bits are not contradictory.

[chad878262]

In case you are, just how much "need" do you mean when you say "need"? When I said I could fit those numbers into my build regardless of the fourth class I was not really taking metamagic feats into account beyond Extend.

As a blaster you really NEED at least Extend or Maximize AND Quicken. I think this is what Invoker was talking about. Extend is actually not a need for a blaster, Empower, Maximize and Quicken are the three you really want to have. Idea being Empower is +2 levels, Maximize +3 and Quicken +4. With Arcane Scholar these levels are reduced to +1, +2 and +3...

Magic classes that don't just buff up and smack things are a bit beyond me still, but I'm learning as best I can!

You and me both man, you and me both....good thing experimentation and learning is where the fun comes in (except when you do something really dumb or something happens you weren't prepared for and get fugued, that pretty much sucks.)

[Rhifox]

You only ever need three metamagic feats if you are NOT a Frost Mage. If you ARE a Frost Mage, Improved Empowered Spell is almost mandatory. In any case, if you play well, you'll always be at least viable.

I'll be honest, in past builds without Arcane Scholar I only ever took Extend Spell. I take it you're referring to Empower and Maximize?

Empower or Maximize, and Quicken.

In case you are, just how much "need" do you mean when you say "need"?

About as much as you "need" Extend. They're highly useful for getting the most use out of your spells and having an answer to all potential situations (though RP situations are often benefited most by Still/Silent, but those are less effective for mechanical play aside from Still for gishes). I wouldn't say any metamagic is an absolute must-take but Quicken is amazing for emergencies (of which any unexpected PvP or DM encounter while you're missing most of your buffs counts) and Empower/Maximize are highly valuable if you ever want to fling damage spells or random variable save-or-suck spells (like Ray of Enfeeblement etc). For a support-heavy caster I can see ditching Empower/Maximize, and like Chad said you can often do away with Extend on blaster builds (or spontaneous casters with their many spell slots), but Quicken is always valuable.

[Invoker]

About as much as you "need" Extend. They're highly useful for getting the most use out of your spells and having an answer to all potential situations (though RP situations are often benefited most by Still/Silent, but those are less effective for mechanical play aside from Still for gishes). I wouldn't say any metamagic is a must-take but Quicken is amazing for emergencies and Empower/Maximize are highly valuable if you ever want to fling damage spells or random variable save-or-suck spells (like Ray of Enfeeblement etc). For a support-heavy caster I can see ditching Empower/Maximize, but Quicken is always valuable.

Lots of good points.

A spontaneous caster can do away without Extend, but not a Wizard like him, especially in the face of the unknown (DM events, for instance).

Quickened snares and speed boosts are excellent examples of how unassuming spells of the first two circles, when quickened, can absolutely destroy worlds.

A small correction on Ray of Enfeeblement: just like Moonbolt, for instance, does not allow for a save. And that's just how powerful it is. Empowered or Maximised, when landed (and it's easy to land) can basically stop dead any non-str build for the duration.

Empowered/Maximised Evard's, for instance, is another very dangerous spell in the right hands.

[Rhifox]

Yeah, you're right about Ray. Wrong wording on my part to call it save-or-suck, it's just flatout suck. Maximized Moonbolt is my go-to pvp ability on my shaman for the same reason.

[Side]

I think I've got two mostly fleshed out builds to decide on now, and the decision's pretty much fully based on what style of play I want to focus on. They both have a variety of flavor I'll be more than happy to work with, and they both are probably decent at actually playing the game.

Now I just have to sit down and think.

Thanks yet again for the help everyone! I've got only a few questions that are mostly to help me make final decisions before I decide whether to RCR or not:

If I can't free up two feat slots what is more important for a wizard, Extend or Quicken?

Which would be more mechanically viable, 30 INT and two epic spells, or 32 INT?

If having both Extend and Quicken is important enough would 30 INT, one epic spell, and the other of the two metamagics be a reasonable option?

Do the mechanical benefits of Beckon the Frozen outweigh it's mechanical weaknesses, or is it pretty much exclusively a flavor feat? (I'm not looking at replacing it with a metamagic, I like the RP too much, I just don't have enough experience to answer this question myself)

[Invoker]

If I can't free up two feat slots what is more important for a wizard, Extend or Quicken?

It's one of those choices Raistlin Majere would not approve of

Personally speaking, I'd try Extend and procure myself a few wands (spell mantle being one of them).

Which would be more mechanically viable, 30 INT and two epic spells, or 32 INT?

If having both Extend and Quicken is important enough would 30 INT, one epic spell, and the other of the two metamagics be a reasonable option?

30 INT + Epic Spell + the missing Metamagic is probably the lesser evil.

Do the mechanical benefits of Beckon the Frozen outweigh it's mechanical weaknesses, or is it pretty much exclusively a flavor feat? (I'm not looking at replacing it with a metamagic, I like the RP too much, I just don't have enough experience to answer this question myself)

I don't know. My time on the server pre-dates the introduction of this feat (at least, in its working form...)

[chad878262]

wouldn't the weakness of beckon the frozen (weakness to fire) be solved by casting energy immunity: fire on the summon? I am not sure of this as I have never played or tested Frost Mage, just thinking that would be the obvious thing to do. Maybe Beckon the Frozen makes energy immunity not work?