Maze of Sleepy Repletion [3.5 spell, PEACH]

[TuggyNE]

I seem to be on a roll tonight. :smallbiggrin:


Maze of Sleepy Repletion
Enchantment (Compulsion) [Mind-Affecting]
Level: Sor/Wiz 6, Brd 5
Components: V, S, SF
Casting Time: 1 round
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Target: One creature
Duration: Permanent
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes

"You are feeling very sleepy.... You see a plate full of good things to eat in front of you...."

On a failed save, you cause the target to fall into a deep and dreamy slumber, from which it cannot be wakened by any means except strong magic. It believes itself to be eating its fill of the most delicious foods it knows of, and resting in the softest beds. Actually, it will remain there until it dies of starvation, thirst, exposure, or wandering creatures.

The target receives a new save every 24 hours at a -2 penalty; success ends the spell.

This spell cannot be removed with dispel magic. break enchantment can, however, on a successful CL check against a DC of 11+the original caster level. Remove curse is also effective if cast at a higher caster level than this spell.

Any other spell lists this should be on? (Beguiler??)

Making sure break enchantment/remove curse work again, adjusting wording of effective duration to encompass a great deal more
Spell level adjustment and dumping the confusion which is too much of a hassle
Boom, school focus. Added clause to clarify that no, rouse and friends will not work to wake them up
Removed material components
Took domains back out :smallsigh:
Fixed subschool
Added periodic saves
Added domains
Added chance for break enchantment to work on this

[Steward]

As far as Cleric domains go, I can definitely see this one on the Hunger domain (Spell Compendium) and Trickery domain (PHB).

I think 'break enchantment' should have at least a chance of removing this effect too.

[TuggyNE]

Ah, thanks. Good call on both of those.

Heh, realized as I was updating this that we now know what the wood elves used on Bombur and Bilbo in Mirkwood... :smallwink:

[Madara]

Its kinda low level for its power, but Enchantment is a weak school, so it works. Because so many are immune to Mind-affecting, keep it where its at. Maybe add an HD limit?

[JoshuaZ]

It might help to compare it to Microcosm (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/microcosm.htm) which is 9th level and only somewhat harder to remove. However, there are fourth level effective saves or dies, so this may be ok as is.

[Eurus]

I might give the victim a new save every 24 hours. It's a small difference, but permanent-stasis spells tend to be higher level than flat save-or-dies for some reason.

[TuggyNE]

I might give the victim a new save every 24 hours. It's a small difference, but permanent-stasis spells tend to be higher level than flat save-or-dies for some reason.

That seems like a good idea; added it.


Its kinda low level for its power, but Enchantment is a weak school, so it works. Because so many are immune to Mind-affecting, keep it where its at. Maybe add an HD limit?

What limit would you suggest?

[Madara]

Let's see, Sleep is 1st level and affects 4HD, but it doesn't scale.

4th level would be 16HD. That should be plenty since its a single target spell.

[TuggyNE]

Let's see, Sleep is 1st level and affects 4HD, but it doesn't scale.

4th level would be 16HD. That should be plenty since its a single target spell.

Deep Slumber is 10 HD at 3rd; that would suggest 13 HD with a strict progression, or perhaps 15 HD a bit more permissively. I suppose that's not unreasonable.

Edit: OTOH, those are both multi-target spells; I'm not sure it would make as much sense for this.

[Cieyrin]

I wouldn't add it to domain spell lists unless you make a new domain, as they already have spells at those levels. They're balanced against having a limited list.

I also wouldn't add a HD limit, as it's a curse-like effect, which don't typically have such things. Especially since, as has been said, it's single target, not multi. It already has a save, that's all the resistance it needs.

[TuggyNE]

I wouldn't add it to domain spell lists unless you make a new domain, as they already have spells at those levels. They're balanced against having a limited list.

I suppose you're right. Ah well.


I also wouldn't add a HD limit, as it's a curse-like effect, which don't typically have such things. Especially since, as has been said, it's single target, not multi. It already has a save, that's all the resistance it needs.

Yeah, that's kind of what I was thinking. Adding an HD limit would either make it too restrictive, or would never come into play.

[JoshuaZ]

One thing you can do for domain specific spells to keep them still balanced is make them available to available to all clerics and then make it available as one level lower to the domain type (but not make it a *domain* spell). So make it Cleric 5, and then allow those with the desired domain the option of preparing it as a 4th level spell. (Or make it cleric 6 and make them have the option of preparing it as a 5th level spell).

I think there's an official splatbook that did that for some spells, but I can't find examples offhand.

[Cieyrin]

One thing you can do for domain specific spells to keep them still balanced is make them available to available to all clerics and then make it available as one level lower to the domain type (but not make it a *domain* spell). So make it Cleric 5, and then allow those with the desired domain the option of preparing it as a 4th level spell. (Or make it cleric 6 and make them have the option of preparing it as a 5th level spell).

I think there's an official splatbook that did that for some spells, but I can't find examples offhand.

Really? I'm intrigued. If you find it, I'd love to hear about it, as I can't think of any rules doing that. The closest I can think of is Ardent's trading powers out of Mantles and that's not anywhere close.

[TuggyNE]

One thing you can do for domain specific spells to keep them still balanced is make them available to available to all clerics and then make it available as one level lower to the domain type (but not make it a *domain* spell). So make it Cleric 5, and then allow those with the desired domain the option of preparing it as a 4th level spell. (Or make it cleric 6 and make them have the option of preparing it as a 5th level spell).

The issue with that in this case is Maze doesn't feel much like a general cleric spell in the first place. Also, I'm not familiar with this specific mechanism, so it would feel a little weird. Ah well.

I may include a note on suggested adaptations, or whatever.

[TuggyNE]

I decided that, since I support removing all free material components as a houserule, I should probably remove them from my homebrewed spells, too. (This one used to require "a piece of cloth from a child's set of nightclothes", in case you're curious.)

[TuggyNE]

School focus changes, plus new wording in spell description to make sure you can't just dump rouse on them and get rid of it.

[Vadskye]

4th level save or die with the bonus option to take the enemy alive that is still action denial on a successful save? Way, way too powerful. This is better than Finger of Death.

[TuggyNE]

Good to get some more critiques on these old things. :smallwink:


4th level save or die with the bonus option to take the enemy alive that is still action denial on a successful save? Way, way too powerful. This is better than Finger of Death.

Hmm. The confusion effect is something around a third-level spell (no save, but otherwise lesser confusion). The primary effect is, on the one hand, a little harder to resist than phantasmal killer (Will-negates Enchantment that doesn't provide ongoing control vs Will/Fort-negates mind-affecting fear), but on the other hand isn't quite as strong an effect. Still, maybe that's more of a 5th-level spell, being strictly inferior in most respects to flesh to stone. Let's try that.

[Zaydos]

As written it's a better version of Endless Slumber (Complete Mage) which is a 6th level spell.

Also Greater Dispel Magic should be able to remove it as it can remove curses and other effects that normally need Break Enchantment or Remove Curse.

Sleep that damage doesn't wake up is every bit as strong, and stronger than, a death effect making it much stronger than Phantasmal Killer which grants 2 saves.

[Vadskye]

Good to get some more critiques on these old things. :smallwink:
Age is no object to being interesting!

Hmm. The confusion effect is something around a third-level spell (no save, but otherwise lesser confusion)
How much is not having a save worth? The answer is a lot. Otto's Irresistible Dance is pretty much just a no-save version of Hideous Laughter (the shorter duration doesn't make a difference, since anything hit by it is almost certainly dead by the end anyway) and it both requires a touch attack and is a whopping six levels higher.

The primary effect is, on the one hand, a little harder to resist than phantasmal killer (Will-negates Enchantment that doesn't provide ongoing control vs Will/Fort-negates mind-affecting fear), but on the other hand isn't quite as strong an effect. Still, maybe that's more of a 5th-level spell, being strictly inferior in most respects to flesh to stone. Let's try that.
Phantasmal killer is also mind-affecting; the only significant difference is that this spell is more flexible and only allows one save instead of two. Likewise, flesh to stone is similar but worse in 90% of cases, since it also nukes gear, makes it much harder (though not impossible) to take foes captive, and doesn't have a no-save action denial effect tacked on. It does have a longer range and only a standard action casting time, but full-round isn't that big of a change. Without the confusion effect, I'd put this as a sixth level spell, being very similar to flesh to stone: it has a better effect, but is mind-affecting and has other downsides.

[TuggyNE]

As written it's a better version of Endless Slumber (Complete Mage) which is a 6th level spell.

Bother!


Also Greater Dispel Magic should be able to remove it as it can remove curses and other effects that normally need Break Enchantment or Remove Curse.

Hmm, sure enough. Easy enough to fix, fortunately.


Sleep that damage doesn't wake up is every bit as strong, and stronger than, a death effect making it much stronger than Phantasmal Killer which grants 2 saves.

PK isn't a death effect, it's just a mind-affecting fear save-or-die. Repeated saves to recover, and being able to use a cheap spell to cure it (instead of 5kgp diamonds) is pretty relevant.


Age is no object to being interesting!

How much is not having a save worth? The answer is a lot. Otto's Irresistible Dance is pretty much just a no-save version of Hideous Laughter (the shorter duration doesn't make a difference, since anything hit by it is almost certainly dead by the end anyway) and it both requires a touch attack and is a whopping six levels higher.

I stand corrected. Should have remembered that, really.


Phantasmal killer is also mind-affecting; the only significant difference is that this spell is more flexible and only allows one save instead of two. Likewise, flesh to stone is similar but worse in 90% of cases, since it also nukes gear, makes it much harder (though not impossible) to take foes captive, and doesn't have a no-save action denial effect tacked on. It does have a longer range and only a standard action casting time, but full-round isn't that big of a change. Without the confusion effect, I'd put this as a sixth level spell, being very similar to flesh to stone: it has a better effect, but is mind-affecting and has other downsides.

Underlined is a fair point I had not previously considered either. Although flesh to stone has advantages too: not mind-affecting, no continuing save, instantaneous instead of permanent, and so on.

Thinking about this some more, the confusion is really not all that essential to the concept; it was intended to be a lot more minor than it is. Probably not worth keeping around. I'm also not totally sure why it's a full-round instead of 1 round.

[Vadskye]

After these changes, I am definitely starting to like the spell. Pondering how to add it to the Spell Reformation... I think it's fairly comfortable in its new slot, and the 1 round casting time ensures that it's not super easy to pull off and allows it to avoid being better than something like a Finger of Death. Minor points, since you take criticism so well:

Wouldn't it stay there until it dies of thirst, not starves?
What's the point of the -2 penalty to repeated saves? There's nothing exactly wrong with it, it just feels kind of random - an extra fact to remember that will only matter maybe 5% of the time it is cast.
Do you want to add that it can be removed with [i]remove curse[i]? And can this be removed by [i]break enchantment[i]? As written, the answer is "no", and I want to make sure that that is what you intend. I feel like [i]break enchantment[i], at least, should be able to remove an enchantment like this.
"Sleepy" in the title feels like a kind of boring word to me. And what does this have to do with a "Maze"? It bears some functional similarity to Maze, but I am not sure it fits as a description. I'm not sure what a better title would be - perhaps "Lethargic Repletion" or "Engorging Slumber"?

[TuggyNE]

After these changes, I am definitely starting to like the spell. Pondering how to add it to the Spell Reformation... I think it's fairly comfortable in its new slot, and the 1 round casting time ensures that it's not super easy to pull off and allows it to avoid being better than something like a Finger of Death.

Good to hear!

I should probably put a note somewhere what license to use for my stuff. OGL, I expect. Been putting that off for a while.


Minor points, since you take criticism so well:

Heh, thanks. I try to keep my limits in mind. This just happens to be a place where a lot of them showed up!:smallsigh:


Wouldn't it stay there until it dies of thirst, not starves?

Yeah, but "parches to death" or "dies of thirst" are so clunky. It just doesn't flow well. :smalltongue:

[Edit]Ah, there we go.[End Edit]


What's the point of the -2 penalty to repeated saves? There's nothing exactly wrong with it, it just feels kind of random - an extra fact to remember that will only matter maybe 5% of the time it is cast.

Hmm. I should probably justify this more thoroughly, but the basic idea is so that once you fail a save, you're more likely to stay that way.

Gonna think on this some more.


Do you want to add that it can be removed with [i]remove curse[i]? And can this be removed by [i]break enchantment[i]? As written, the answer is "no", and I want to make sure that that is what you intend. I feel like [i]break enchantment[i], at least, should be able to remove an enchantment like this.

I actually juuust removed the specific text for those, since I considered them redundant, but I'd briefly forgotten break enchantment's spell limit of 5. Annoying.


"Sleepy" in the title feels like a kind of boring word to me. And what does this have to do with a "Maze"? It bears some functional similarity to Maze, but I am not sure it fits as a description. I'm not sure what a better title would be - perhaps "Lethargic Repletion" or "Engorging Slumber"?

It's a quote from an old book (The Magic City, by E. Nesbit). :smallsmile: