I don't get it?(umd)

[Oshido]

Sorry if I am about to necro an old topic. I just can't wrap my head around it. A 3 lvl dip in rogue and a melee can cast from a scroll at cl 30? Dispel like a dedicated caster and be a jaugernaught of melee destruction as well? Or perhaps I am wrong and have missed something as usual.

[One Two Three Five]

That's not how it works. Scrolls and wands cast at the CL of the wand.

[Rabbid]

Potions I believe will be based off the level 30 though.

I could be wrong.

[Oshido]

So if a lvl 30 caster makes a scroll and a lvl 30 melee uses it. It's cast at cl what?

[Lorkas]

For spell effects (duration, number of damage dice for spells like fireball, and so forth) and for spell penetration purposes, all spells cast from items (wands, potions, scrolls, magic books, and any other items that can cast spell effects) use the number in parentheses on the item property as the caster level.

So for example, "Fireball (5)" casts a fireball that does 5d6 damage, while "Fireball (10)" casts a fireball that does 10d6 damage. For another example, "Endurance (3)" casts an endurance effect that lasts for 3 hours, while "Endurance (15)" casts the same effect with a duration of 15 hours.

Here's what you heard about the CL 30 mundane thing:
For the purposes of resisting a dispel, all spells cast from items use the caster level of the last spell cast from a character's spell book. A character who was Fighter 20 / WM 7 / Bard 3 who had cast Mage Armor from their own bard spell book would be dispelled as a level 3 character.

If you never cast spells from your own spellbook, however, the game defaults to using your full character level in the check to resist dispels. So the same character would use 30 for their dispel resistance checks if they just never cast mage armor (or any other spell) from their bard spellbook. By the same token, a character who has no casting classes at all will always use their full character level for their wand-buffs to resist dispels, since it's impossible for them to ever have cast a spell from their own (nonexistent) spellbook.

[One Two Three Five]

It's of note that reverting it to 'whatever your actual real caster level' is, would make high level melees.. oh, fairly worse lets say, at least in PvE, due to how much dispel is used. (Less now, but.)

[Shadowy Reality]

Melees, specially those with WM levels are likely the easiest characters to do PvE with. You can solo most places with only a potion of Bulls and Bark.

That they would become much worse in PvP that is true. But again, I think it is silly an epic abjurer has trouble dispelling someone that barely knows how magic works.

[MissEvelyn]

That they would become much worse in PvP that is true. But again, I think it is silly an epic abjurer has trouble dispelling someone that barely knows how magic works.

This. It's beyond silly.

A serious change needs to happen. Maybe make it a third of the non-caster character's level.

[Cortex]

That'd destroy mundanes and create a new Mage World Order.

Making mundanes more vulnerable to dispels could work, but it'd have to be done carefully, verging on their advantage still before anything else drastic is done, otherwise it's good bye clarity hello perma crowd control. Or hasta la vista death ward and greetings fugue.

[Dorkas]

I think it is silly an epic abjurer has trouble dispelling someone that barely knows how magic works.

Right? And ironically characters who actually know how to use magic even if they're melee capable like bards or clerics, still constantly get ez pz dispelled, especially by npcs. So fuuuuuuuuuuuuun

[One Two Three Five]

Cortex is right here. It'd destroy mundanes so bad, both in PvE and PvP. Like, more securely than any amount of material rarity ever would. Mages don't really need more help being better at this or that thing.

Also, have some forethought: You make wands/potions/scrolls easy to dispel from any and all mobs, players, whatever. This makes them less valuable. Why would I pay x amount of money for an II wand if I know it'll get removed the first time something looks at me funny? So, less money to mages.

barely knows how magic works.

Man, it's almost like they invested in a skill whose name literally implies they know how to use magic devices. Makes you think

Edit: What am I doing? I play casters!
Yeah, blow rogues, barbs, fighters, right out of the water. Destroy them. No more stealthers. No more WMs.

[susitsu]

true sight and hold person tho

[Thake]

Cortex is right here. It'd destroy mundanes so bad, both in PvE and PvP. Like, more securely than any amount of material rarity ever would. Mages don't really need more help being better at this or that thing.

Also, have some forethought: You make wands/potions/scrolls easy to dispel from any and all mobs, players, whatever. This makes them less valuable. Why would I pay x amount of money for an II wand if I know it'll get removed the first time something looks at me funny? So, less money to mages.

barely knows how magic works.

Man, it's almost like they invested in a skill whose name literally implies they know how to use magic devices. Makes you think

Edit: What am I doing? I play casters!
Yeah, blow rogues, barbs, fighters, right out of the water. Destroy them. No more stealthers. No more WMs.

I don't think Cortex is right here. At least not entirely.. Anything without dispels is just the same, and that's a lot.

Secondly, there is a reason why those beefy melee builds have strong fort saves, it is to resist the death spells. There is a reason why magic users have means to protect themself against said spells, because their fort save sux

If anything, casters would sell more wands, because them mundanes have to use them more often.

You simply can't deny that it's silly having someone with an UMD dip (yes, I say 95% of UMD dudes have decided at some point "Hello world, I've spent my whole life - a.k.a. lvl 1-28/29/30 - not knowing how to fekking use a scroll of light, but now BOOYA, call me timestop-man"), resist better than people actually dedicating half and more of their career to use magic daily.

[Shadowy Reality]

That'd destroy mundanes and create a new Mage World Order.

This is wrong or at least not entirely true. I had a Kensai that could very reliably do saves in the 40s. And that was with no wards and Spellcraft as cross-class.

If your typical WM enchants +Uni Saves instead of Con and goes Bard instead of Rogue it can do about the same with minimal wards.

[Seven Sons of Sin]

I think the real problem with the CL 30 stuff is that it makes rangers and paladins harder to play. You have class-specific spells that you want to cast but then, if you're not a pure class, you'll get dispelled in a heartbeat.

Whereas fighters, rogues, and barbarians don't care about casting spells, but can ward up to the nine, and go toe-to-toe.

I wish there was a way of increasing the CL of rangers and paladins who have their majority build in one of those classes. At least they'll be able to keep their meager 5 buffs that they self-casted.

[Umskiptar]

If your typical WM enchants +Uni Saves instead of Con and goes Bard instead of Rogue it can do about the same with minimal wards.

Sounds like a good way to die to IGMS/Greater Ruin/Hellball -- and to random mobs in dungeons together with that. Frontliners need HP.

Mages would be even better than they are now if a change like this was to happen.

[One Two Three Five]

That right there. Don't protect yourself with magic from magic, weaken yourself to everything and also to magic, to protect yourself from magic.

[Shadowy Reality]

6 items give you 90 HP. In a fight with a mage I am going to say +6 saves is a bit better.

What you don't want is to gimp your ability against non-magical users in which saves matter few. Basically you want to have the best of both worlds.

I would also like to have 4 chances of dealing 30-100 per round without consuming spell components and with infinite uses per day on my mage. WMs can kill a mage in two or three hits, seeing dispels are we worthless the mage basically has to chew through their HP instead of disabling. WMs get more out of -prays and restoration scrolls.

[Liareth]

What about a change where everybody has a caster level equal to their total level? (for spell resistance and dispels) Would that put everybody on equal footing and makes things more fair?

[One Two Three Five]

Theoretically? It'd work the same like dispelling warlocks.
1d20+20+focuses vs 12+30.
Or 40 max+ focuses vs 42.
Abjuration foci bring that up to a possible 46 for a.. I think, 20%? chance to dispel anyone with epic abjuration focus. (Arcane defense: Abj makes this even harder)

All that said, I've always found breaching to be easier than dispelling anyway.

[Shadowy Reality]

What about a change where everybody has a caster level equal to their total level? (for spell resistance and dispels) Would that put everybody on equal footing and makes things more fair?

That is fairer, yes. Those that dip for UMD have their CL 30. Casters that dip for Disc have their CL lowered. That was assimetric. At least there is a chance this way, which is better than nothing.

[Trunx]

What about a change where everybody has a caster level equal to their total level? (for spell resistance and dispels) Would that put everybody on equal footing and makes things more fair?

That'd make battleclerics and battlebards overpowered. They're balanced right now by the fact that while they can cast powerful buffs, they're vulnerable to dispels. Make them practically undispellable and mundanes become strictly worse. Battleclerics in particular would be insanely overpowered.

[One Two Three Five]

I wouldn't say insanely. (Equal it out an extra +1 to dispels for each abjur focus, maybe?) Battleclerics don't run that much that both can be dispelled, are worth dispelling, and aren't on the breach list. Imp invis? You can't dispel much of their AC, kiting for a minute or two fixes the AB buffs.. Stat buffs?

Battlebards are in a similar boat, really. Most of their good spell (II, haste) are either short-lasting or on the breach list. Their power generally comes from bard song+curse song, rather than wizard-esque buffspam.

Battleclerics, notably, still have no defense against good ol igms spam

[Trunx]

I wouldn't say insanely. (Equal it out an extra +1 to dispels for each abjur focus, maybe?) Battleclerics don't run that much that both can be dispelled, are worth dispelling, and aren't on the breach list. Imp invis? You can't dispel much of their AC, kiting for a minute or two fixes the AB buffs.. Stat buffs?

Battlebards are in a similar boat, really. Most of their good spell (II, haste) are either short-lasting or on the breach list. Their power generally comes from bard song+curse song, rather than wizard-esque buffspam.

Battleclerics, notably, still have no defense against good ol igms spam

Battleclerics run a whole ton of stuff that can be dispelled and they depend on. Haste, improved invis, shield of faith, bull's strength, cat's grace, owl's wisdom, battletide, divine favor, divine power, eagle's splendor if CHA build, see invis, true seeing, the list goes on. They would be better in every way compared to other melee builds if they had 30 CL dispels while multiclassed with bard and fighter.

And battleclerics with GSF are immune to IGMs spam, and they have their own heals. They're the best against IGMS spam.

[One Two Three Five]

What battlecleric takes GSF abjur

Covered the ab buffs, covered imp invis, shield of faith is on the breach list, etc etc etc.
Keep it as is, then. Hell, I even covered everyone being near impossible to dispel a couple posts up. I've always found the wind-up time to be the biggest barrier to the entire server being full of battleclerics, myself. And, you know, having to roleplay the whole priest thing.

All that said, they lose the incredibly narrow (and effective) focus that your average WM has.
But I wouldn't play with the CL thing, myself. Mundanes need it to function, if everyone had it, dispels would need changed, and then we're back where we were.