[3.X] Irresistible Spell good?

[Yael]

How do you guys see this metamagic feat?

{{scrubbed}}

Its prerequisite is this:
{{scrubbed}}

I think there's an errata somewhere, where Irresistible Spell was changed to a +10 to DC, but I've seen DMs using the first one. What do you playgrounders think? Would be good to focus on it (Metaphysical Spellshaper/Incantatrix/Arcane Thesis/Etc)?

[Kalaska'Agathas]

This is that Dragonlance feat, right? As written, yeah, that's pretty spectacular. Completely invalidating an entire defense for less than it costs to persist? But its provenance provides a barrier to its use, assuming it is indeed from Dragonlance.

[kardar233]

It's from Kingdoms of Kalamar, actually.

[The Glyphstone]

That's not even from Dragonlance...it's from a 3rd-party licensed book called Kingdoms of Kalamar, if I remember right.

EDIT: Double Swordsaged.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

It's from Kingdoms of Kalamar, actually.


That's not even from Dragonlance...it's from a 3rd-party licensed book called Kingdoms of Kalamar, if I remember right.

EDIT: Double Swordsaged.

Ah, right. Not that it much improves its chances for being allowed, eh?

[Yael]

How about it on a metamagic rod?

I think it would cost the same that Quicken spell, doesn't it?

[Grod_The_Giant]

It's spectacularly broken. It's turns spells into "no save, just lose." Even at +10 DC, it's broken, though not as insanely. Even without metamagic reduction, it's too good. No-save Glitterdust or Ghoul Touch as a 6th level spell? Sold.

Basically, do not do this. Seriously, don't, not unless the rest of your party are playing Planar Shepherds and Tainted Scholars and such.

[Chronos]

Consider that people often take Heighten Spell for no reason other than to increase save DCs (because really, how common are Globes of Invulnerability?). That's an adjustment to level equal to the amount the DC is raised by, while this is a +4 levels for +10 DC (even in the errataed version). Now, granted, Heighten is more flexible, in that you can also use it if you only have room for 3 or fewer levels, but when the disparity is that large at the high end, that's cold comfort.

[sideswipe]

so if i used it on phantasmal killer they would just die. nothing else?

way too broken

[The Glyphstone]

Ah, right. Not that it much improves its chances for being allowed, eh?

Decreases its odds, in most cases. People have at least heard of Dragonlance, but Kalamar is utterly obscure to anyone who doesn't play Hackmaster.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

The Kingdoms of Kalamar books have the D&D logo on the cover, just like the Eberron and Forgotten Realms books. The Dragonlance books are simply d20 supplements, no D&D logo anywhere. Therefore, Kalamar books are more suitable for any generic D&D game than the Dragonlance books.
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/515TE5WKD7L._SX258_PJlook-inside-v2,TopRight,1,0_SH20_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51O76dj-bvL._SY344_PJlook-inside-v2,TopRight,1,0_SH20_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg

Edit: Envelop the Wall was reprinted in Complete Arcane as Fortify Spell. The official 3.5 update (http://www.kenzerco.com/Orpg/kalamar/KPG5_feats.pdf) for the book Irresistible Spell is contained in does not modify that feat at all.

[Karnith]

The Dragonlance books are simply d20 supplements, no D&D logo anywhere.
Minor clarification: This is not true of the Dragonlance (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=products/dlacc/869900000)Campaign (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ag/20030808a)Setting (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20030801a), which was published by WotC, has the Dungeons and Dragons logo on the spine, and has the words "Dungeons & Dragons Campaign Setting" above the big Dragonlance logo on the cover (as happens with most other campaign setting books). The later Dragonlance books, of course, were not published by WotC, nor do they feature the Dungeons and Dragons logo.

As I recall, Kenzer & Company got to use the D&D logo as a result of some legal snafu between the two companies.

[Kraken]

There's a feat, spell swap I think it's called, also from KoK, that allows wizards to spontaneously change their prepared spells for a trivial spellcraft check. Regardless of its publishing status, I've never played at a table that allowed KoK (if they'd even heard of it) material, simply due to all the stupid crap that it contains.

[TypoNinja]

Minor clarification: This is not true of the Dragonlance Campaign Setting (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ex/20030801a), which was published by WotC, has the Dungeons and Dragons logo on the spine, and has the words "Dungeons & Dragons Campaign Setting" above the big Dragonlance logo (as happens with most other campaign setting books).

The later Dragonlance books were not published by WotC, nor do they feature the Dungeons and Dragons logo.

Dragonlance has an odd history, since a publisher other than TSR/WotC owns the rights to Dragonlance stuff, but there has been an official Dragonlance publication with D&D for a very long time.

Every so often it comes up that people say its not official. It is, WotC sells it on their website, hosts images that include the D&D logo over Dragonlance art, the inside cover of the source book has all the legal mumbojumbo you'd expect on an official property, a WotC logo and corporate information. The OGL disclaimer opens with the words "This Wizards of the Coast game product contains no Open Game Content."

This is not third party material.

[Jack_Simth]

so if i used it on phantasmal killer they would just die. nothing else?

way too broken
If they weren't immune for some reason (Phantasmal Killer has both the Fear and the Mind-affecting tags)... pretty much, yes... although it's Hideous Laughter, Glitterdust, and a handful of others that are the poster children for Broken with it.

... although it got errata'd to +10 DC for +4 adjustment. Still insane.

[Blackhawk748]

KoK has pretty much one broken thing, which is Irresistible spell. Miser with Magic is amazing but, while you qualify for it at lvl 7 you cant grab it till lvl 9 unless you get a bonus metamagic feat. Otherwise KoK is pretty much you standard campaign setting. Also i really like it, but i realize that it is personal taste there and my group tends to avoid the obviously broken stuff.

Also ive never heard of Spell Swap or anything like it.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

There's a feat, spell swap I think it's called, also from KoK, that allows wizards to spontaneously change their prepared spells for a trivial spellcraft check. Regardless of its publishing status, I've never played at a table that allowed KoK (if they'd even heard of it) material, simply due to all the stupid crap that it contains.

Wow, that's also pretty spectacular, provided the spellcraft check is as trivial as you say.


KoK has pretty much one broken thing, which is Irresistible spell. Miser with Magic is amazing but, while you qualify for it at lvl 7 you cant grab it till lvl 9 unless you get a bonus metamagic feat. Otherwise KoK is pretty much you standard campaign setting. Also i really like it, but i realize that it is personal taste there and my group tends to avoid the obviously broken stuff.

Also ive never heard of Spell Swap or anything like it.

That's why I thought it was Dragonlance! I'd heard of Irresistible Spell and Miser With Magic, from another player who was big into Dragonlance, and I'd assumed Kingdoms of Kalamar was a Dragonlance splat, like Unaproachable East for Forgotten Realms or Secrets of Sarlona for Eberron, since he was "that Dragonlance guy" in a lot of ways.

And Miser With Magic is a pretty excellent feat, regardless of only being able to pick it up at ninth level.

[Blackhawk748]

Oh it is, no doubt about that, but its not OP, as if you screw up the check bad enough you dont even cast the spell

[ericgrau]

Charm person (the army begins)
Silent image (ITS FRIGGIN REAL OK)
Pyrotechnics + party closes eyes upon secret signal

Also spam sepia snake sigil traps on signs, it's even SR no.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

Oh it is, no doubt about that, but its not OP, as if you screw up the check bad enough you dont even cast the spell

It is both trivially easy and completely normal for a spellcaster to have a Spellcraft score which will recover the spell on a natural one, even if it's ninth level. And since you don't fail skill checks on a natural one, that means that most spellcasters who take Miser With Magic will always recover their spells.

Seriously, a ninth level Wizard with a starting Int of 18, who has put both their stat boosts to Int, with full ranks in Spellcraft, and at least 5 ranks in Knowledge: Arcana has a Spellcraft score of 19. That means they will always recover spells of fifth level or lower (since they'll always roll at least a one, for a total check of at least twenty, which is the DC to meet) - handy, since that's the highest level they can cast (in most cases). This is without any of the Int and Spellcraft boosters they'd likely have anyway. They essentially can't screw up the check.

[Kraken]

Wow, that's also pretty spectacular, provided the spellcraft check is as trivial as you say.

10+spell level, which I'm sure they thought would be balanced by the fact that, like with miser, you lose the slot for the day if you fail the check. It's in the Villain Design Handbook. It's only requirements are that you be a wizard, and that you "train in Svimohzia," aka backstory adjustment necessary.

[Kalaska'Agathas]

10+spell level, which I'm sure they thought would be balanced by the fact that, like with miser, you lose the slot for the day if you fail the check. It's in the Villain Design Handbook. It's only requirements are that you be a wizard, and that you "train in Svimohzia," aka backstory adjustment necessary.

It's amazing how these things made it through playtesting - simply taking Spellcraft and Knowledge: Arcana and putting my 18 into Int (and my two +1s) on a Wizard, and I'm automatically succeeding at the check. It's not like that particular build wouldn't have come up. To have been a fly on the wall while they were playtesting these things! It would have been like a Monty Python sketch.

[SinsI]

Envelop the Wall is Heighten Spell with increased effect.

Irresistible Spell as written is broken and shouldn't be allowed in any game whatsoever:
Add it to Destruction (lvl 7 spell), and you have a spell that auto-kills *anything* that is not protected by anti-magic aura.

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Envelop the Wall is Heighten Spell with increased effect.

Irresistible Spell as written is broken and shouldn't be allowed in any game whatsoever:
Add it to Destruction (lvl 7 spell), and you have a spell that auto-kills *anything* that is not protected by anti-magic aura.

Envelop the Wall only applies to caster level checks, it's a very badly worded predecessor to Fortify Spell from Complete Arcane.

Destruction + (DMM) Irresistible Spell + (Rod of) Chain Spell, 'nuff said.

[Blackhawk748]

10+spell level, which I'm sure they thought would be balanced by the fact that, like with miser, you lose the slot for the day if you fail the check. It's in the Villain Design Handbook. It's only requirements are that you be a wizard, and that you "train in Svimohzia," aka backstory adjustment necessary.

Ah thats where it is, well it was obviously designed with NPCs in mind but thats never stopped a player now has it? lol