What Level Is This Spell?

[prufock]

Just wondering if anyone could take a look at this homebrew spell and suggest what level it should be, or if there is a similar spell. Also what if it was a swift action spell that had to be used that round? Thanks

Two-Dimensional Blade
Transmutation
Level: ?
Components: V, S, DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Slashing Weapon Touched
Duration: See text
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless, object)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless, object)

This spell sharpens your blade to an infinitesimally thin edge. The next attack made with this weapon, if made before the end of your next turn, ignores damage reduction and hardness. If the attack misses, the spell dissipates with no effect.

[Namfuak]

Mountain hammer strike is basically the same but eats your extra attacks in exchange for doing +2d6 damage, it's level 2, which seems reasonable for this. However I might drop it to one for lower progression classes like duskblade.

[Telonius]

Away from my books, but I'd put it at the same spell level as Mountain Hammer's initiator level. It seems like it does just about the same thing.

Also, I'd tighten up the wording - do you mean "either DR or hardness," or "ignores both DR and hardness?"

[Karl Aegis]

7th level. It shoots through schools.

[Crake]

Based on the fluff of it, I would also make the attack resolve vs touch AC. Being a standard action, and only a single attack, it doesn't entirely replace wraithstrike, and being a spell, i think it should be a little more powerful than a maneuver of the same level, since it's expended on use, wheras maneuvers can be recharged.

[weckar]

I'd say it is significantly weaker than mountain hammer, because of the standard action casting time.

[Flickerdart]

Yeah, standard action time + provoking due to casting the spell = 1st level, if anything. But I would strongly recommend making it a swift action.

[Nibbens]

Yeah, standard action time + provoking due to casting the spell = 1st level, if anything. But I would strongly recommend making it a swift action.

I would agree, somewhat. The spell doesn't do extra damage, it just negates natural hardness and allows the blade to surpass it for one round. However, I'd argue against making it a swift action due to a similar concept - true strike. (While TS focuses on attack roll rather than damage, it is similar in the "attack augmenting" department)

One allows a nearly for certain "to hit" and the other is for certain "to cause damage to constructs and objects."

So, using this logic, I'd say 1 action and 1st level spell.

Also, I agree with others on the clarity. The spell lasts for 1 round or until discharged, but the spell descriptor says the effects only work if the attack is "made before the end of your next turn." So what happens if the attack misses, the weapon holds a charge of the spell which now essentially does nothing? lol.

[prufock]

However I might drop it to one for lower progression classes like duskblade.
Yeah, it would fit a duskblade's niche to a T. Definitely would be down one level (unless I make it level 1).


Also, I'd tighten up the wording - do you mean "either DR or hardness," or "ignores both DR and hardness?"
It ignores whichever the target has. As far as I know there aren't any targets with both. Creatures have DR, objects have hardness.


7th level. It shoots through schools.
I don't get it.


Based on the fluff of it, I would also make the attack resolve vs touch AC. Being a standard action, and only a single attack, it doesn't entirely replace wraithstrike, and being a spell, i think it should be a little more powerful than a maneuver of the same level, since it's expended on use, wheras maneuvers can be recharged.
I see your reasoning, but I'm not sure I agree. Two reasons: I don't want this spell to step on the toes of an existing spell and I don't want this spell to be too powerful.


Yeah, standard action time + provoking due to casting the spell = 1st level, if anything. But I would strongly recommend making it a swift action.
Perhaps two versions. Standard at level 1, swift at level 2?


Also, I agree with others on the clarity. The spell lasts for 1 round or until discharged, but the spell descriptor says the effects only work if the attack is "made before the end of your next turn." So what happens if the attack misses, the weapon holds a charge of the spell which now essentially does nothing? lol.
Edited the language a bit. Now it's "see below" duration, as per True Strike, and if your next attack misses you waste the spell. Or should it apply to the first attack that hits?

[Flickerdart]

Perhaps two versions. Standard at level 1, swift at level 2?
I would do standard (min/level until discharged) and swift (1 round until discharged) just to make sure that one spell is not utterly eclipsed by the other.


I would agree, somewhat. The spell doesn't do extra damage, it just negates natural hardness and allows the blade to surpass it for one round. However, I'd argue against making it a swift action due to a similar concept - true strike. (While TS focuses on attack roll rather than damage, it is similar in the "attack augmenting" department)

One allows a nearly for certain "to hit" and the other is for certain "to cause damage to constructs and objects."
True Strike is not the same at all - it allows you to hit vs missing (a binary change). Causing damage is not binary.

[Nibbens]

Edited the language a bit. Now it's "see below" duration, as per True Strike, and if your next attack misses you waste the spell. Or should it apply to the first attack that hits?

I'd try to follow the truestrike spell as closely as possible, adopting the "next single attack roll" formula. Making the spell have a duration of x rds per level could be pushing that envelope a bit.

[NEO|Phyte]

It ignores whichever the target has. As far as I know there aren't any targets with both. Creatures have DR, objects have hardness.

I am aware of at least one creature with hardness (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/psicrystal.htm), and while it doesn't also have DR, DR is significantly easier to get than hardness. Switching it to an AND doesn't make it notably more powerful while catching any edge cases in the rules.

[Nibbens]

True Strike is not the same at all - it allows you to hit vs missing (a binary change). Causing damage is not binary.

Never said it's the same - I said it's a similar concept as both spells augment an attack. I know it's not the same or even in the same ballpark.

If we want to get really hair splitty, the average damage from a Magic Missile would fall into the 3.5 catagory.

The damage from a greatsword (we'll go with a +5 str modifier because that's the normal maximum for a stat as 1st level) would be 2d6+7. The average damage is 14.

Yes, this is above the 1st level spell (even thought that spell is ranged and auto hit, and while our caster would have to be face to face with his enemies and this fits the greater risk greater reward profile, so I feel it's apt) - which is why I suggested having it be a one time use event, rather than a x rounds per level.

But that's just my baggage - and I'm no great arbitrator of these things. I'm just adding my two cents.

[prufock]

I would do standard (min/level until discharged) and swift (1 round until discharged) just to make sure that one spell is not utterly eclipsed by the other.
This isn't a bad idea either.


I am aware of at least one creature with hardness (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/monsters/psicrystal.htm), and while it doesn't also have DR, DR is significantly easier to get than hardness. Switching it to an AND doesn't make it notably more powerful while catching any edge cases in the rules.
Interesting. A psicrystal sharing a DR-granting power gets both. I'm not even sure how that works mechanically. Does it stack or overlap? Either way, the wording is now AND, so there's no confusion.