PDA

View Full Version : Spell Slots Higher Than 10th?



kirbsys
2009-06-03, 01:46 PM
Is it possible to get spell slots higher than 10th? I recall seeing some sort of table with higher spell slots for the purpose of Meta-Magic, but I can't recall the method of obtaining the spell slots, nor can I find the table anywhere. Does it exist, or is it just in my head?

kamikasei
2009-06-03, 01:51 PM
It's an epic feat (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/feats.htm#improvedSpellCapacity).

If you already have 9th-level spells and are epic, you can take this feat to get 10th-level spell slots. Then you can take it again to get 11th-level, and so on.

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-03, 01:51 PM
It's the feat Improved Spell Capacity (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/epicFeats.html#improved-spell-capacity).

kirbsys
2009-06-03, 02:23 PM
Thank you both very much.

shadzar
2009-06-03, 02:23 PM
No. 9th level is as high as it goes, and only for special occasions; because any spell more powerful than a wish could be world breaking and should only be used for very special cases.


There are no spells higher than 9th-level, and there never should be. Including higher-level spells would not only greatly imbalance the game, it would also give characters access to magic reserved exclusively for gods.
DMs contemplating the idea of designing 10th-level or higher spells in spite of this advice should first consider the implications of wish, generally considered to be the most powerful of all the spells. To be worthy of its superior ranking, any 10th-level spell would have to be significantly stronger than a wish, and if the game is to retain its integrity, that's a mighty tall order.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

Trodon
2009-06-03, 02:34 PM
No. 9th level is as high as it goes, and only for special occasions; because any spell more powerful than a wish could be world breaking and should only be used for very special cases.

except for the face that there are level 10 and higher spell slots used only for spells with metamagic feats applied so that the level is 10 or higher

Kylarra
2009-06-03, 02:34 PM
No. 9th level is as high as it goes, and only for special occasions; because any spell more powerful than a wish could be world breaking and should only be used for very special cases.
except it does go past 9? (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spellsintro.htm)

Aside from the fact that you seem to have missed the "for metamagic purposes only" in the OP, epic spellcasting already exists and by its nature is past level 9...

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-03, 02:34 PM
No. 9th level is as high as it goes, and only for special occasions; because any spell more powerful than a wish could be world breaking and should only be used for very special cases.

Nevermind this has absolutely no bearing on 3.X, contradicts the above-linked core/SRD feat, and ignores the fact that while there are 10th+ slots there's no 10th+ spells (the slots are for using metamagic), the quote isn't even accurate of AD&D. I've got my 1995 first printing AD&D Dungeon Master Option: High-Level Campaigns right here, which contains True Dweomers ("often called 10th-level spells or true dweomers", page 118;the AD&D precursor to epic magic which works very similarly, with spells built on seeds). Meanwhile, the AD&D FR Netheril supplements had spells of levels 10th through 14th (I think 14th was the highest; Karsus' transformation is the only 15th-level spell, right?).

shadzar
2009-06-03, 03:05 PM
Worst edition troll ever.

The first post indicated no edition what so ever that I could tell.

I have the CD-ROM, but do not use the Player or DM options, because I never played AD&D 2.5.

If it had been indicated which edition was being asked about then I would have responded with it. Don't blame me for ambiguous questions.

Just now reading about the dweomers you mention it goes along with the previous that above level 9 would be "access to magic reserved exclusively for gods", in that those dweomers are....priest spells. :smallconfused:

Go figure.

Got anything for the arcane or wizards for level 10 and above spells which this thread seems to be talking about?

Not that it matters as this thread has provided the poster with what s/he needed it seems.

Kylarra
2009-06-03, 03:09 PM
The first post indicated no edition what so ever that I could tell.
Citing metamagic use seems to be a pretty strong indication of 3.X AFAIK.

AbyssKnight
2009-06-03, 03:15 PM
The first post indicated no edition what so ever that I could tell.

I have the CD-ROM, but do not use the Player or DM options, because I never played AD&D 2.5.

If it had been indicated which edition was being asked about then I would have responded with it. Don't blame me for ambiguous questions.

Just now reading about the dweomers you mention it goes along with the previous that above level 9 would be "access to magic reserved exclusively for gods", in that those dweomers are....priest spells. :smallconfused:

Go figure.

Got anything for the arcane or wizards for level 10 and above spells which this thread seems to be talking about?

Not that it matters as this thread has provided the poster with what s/he needed it seems.

Well, the first post makes no mention of what type of spells, Arcane or Divine, he is speaking of either.

Look! You make assumptions too.

On the other hand, he does specify Metamagic, which to my knowledge, is a 3.x concept.

And Yes, I too make assumptions. The use of the "he" pronoun in my post. But it is easier than typing "s/he" all the time.

shadzar
2009-06-03, 03:17 PM
Citing metamagic use seems to be a pretty strong indication of 3.X AFAIK.

:smallconfused:


Metamagic is a special term used by erudite and educated wizards to describe a single class of spells and magical items--

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

Not blaming anyone for asking a question or answering it, just that nothing is always what it seems. Have no problem with the question being 3.x specific, just being called out because I couldn't read the posters mind as a troll is what gets my goat.

Kylarra
2009-06-03, 03:27 PM
:smallconfused:



Not blaming anyone for asking a question or answering it, just that nothing is always what it seems. Have no problem with the question being 3.x specific, just being called out because I couldn't read the posters mind as a troll is what gets my goat.I suppose I should rephrase. Citing metamagic use as a reason for increased spell levels should pretty clearly mean 3.X, as 2e "metamagic" spells did not increase the spell level and instead cost you a spell slot and your action for the previous round.

So while simply saying "metamagic" may have tenuous reference to a single book in 2ed, the context is pretty clear that they meant 3.X.

shadzar
2009-06-03, 03:39 PM
{Scrubbed}

Tsotha-lanti
2009-06-03, 04:11 PM
Just now reading about the dweomers you mention it goes along with the previous that above level 9 would be "access to magic reserved exclusively for gods", in that those dweomers are....priest spells. :smallconfused:

Go figure.

Got anything for the arcane or wizards for level 10 and above spells which this thread seems to be talking about?

Well, the OP didn't say anything to indicate arcane or divine (both arcane and divine casters have spell slots and metamagic and can take the ISC feat), but true dweomers from High-Level Campaigns are, indeed, for wizards and clerics, and even psions get a mention (see pages 118-119). Requirements are listed specifically for wizards and priests both, and some quotes include:
"Wizards must be at least 20th level and have Intelligence scores of 18 or higher"
"Wizards can cast any true dweomer that uses schools available to the character"
"Wizards do not need spellbooks to cast true dweomers"

Then there's the Netheril 10th+ level spells (setting/sub-setting specific, but still AD&D and not "2.5"), although I can't recall if those were arcane exclusively or not.


{Scrubbed}

True enough - game/edition assumptions tend to get on my nerves too (although usually it's people assuming 3.5 when the question isn't system-specific at all - argh!), and people should be clear about which system they mean - heck, there's like 4-6 editions of D&D commonly discussed here, with terminology that tends to sound the same but have different meanings, and that's not counting stuff like d20M and Pathfinder.

Likely the reason I interpreted the OP as referring to D&D 3.5 was heuristics - it's the D&D system most familiar to me, and the system most commonly discussed that the terminology fit.

I also apologise for the ad hominem, and I've edited it out of my earlier post.

shadzar
2009-06-03, 04:28 PM
Likely the reason I interpreted the OP as referring to D&D 3.5 was heuristics - it's the D&D system most familiar to me, and the system most commonly discussed that the terminology fit.

I also apologise for the ad hominem, and I've edited it out of my earlier post.

Likewise I interpreted D&D when it could be another game, and answered with all available info I had. Just happened to have post the same time the OP had enough info that this thread should have died prior.

I try to think of D&D in a general sense and offer as many answers to things as possible within the bounds of my knowledge.

The OP did not thing wrong by forgetting to include which edition, but other posters have to realize that as you say there are 11 edition/versions of D&D that carry that name, and many do carry the same terms, so many may not know all about older, or all about newer.

Which Is why I haven't gotten into the "help with my 3.x ?? build" type of threads, because I don't know jack about them and cannot offer anything for char-op on them much.

I just don't know the system and the SRD any one can read to get the basics...

I blame the ambiguity of the name for it all! :smallfurious: D&D!

Roland St. Jude
2009-06-03, 09:05 PM
Sheriff of Moddingham: The OP's question seems to have been answered and this has now degraded into flaming. Thread locked.