PDA

View Full Version : what level should this protection spell be?



nonsi
2016-06-01, 04:36 AM
.
An immediate-action evocation(?) spell that creates a translucent force shield. The shield grants the caster total cover vs. a single offensive action the caster is aware of that requires an attack roll.

Another version would grant total cover until the beginning of the caster's next turn. the caster must choose the 180-degree 1/2-circle where the force shield is directed.

Wranglyph
2016-06-01, 07:27 AM
I'd put that at first or second level; total cover from an attack seems much stronger than other 1st level buffs (like cat's grace: +4 DEX), but most of them last longer than a turn. That's just based on my 3.x knowledge though; I don't know what the balance is like in 5E.

manny2510
2016-06-01, 12:17 PM
1st if it is a reaction that works only against 1 attack.

Jakinbandw
2016-06-01, 01:22 PM
If this is 5e I'd say 3rd. Total cover means you can't be the target of any attack or spell, that's pretty powerful, and the wizard isn't supposed to be able to tank attacks better than a fighter.

So third level of this is 5th.

Temotei
2016-06-03, 11:21 PM
Does 5e even have immediate actions? They're called reactions, aren't they? I think this is for 3.5.

Fizban
2016-06-04, 05:10 PM
If it's 3.5 then this is a trick question: the spell already exists and is far from unknown. Wings of Cover from Races of the Dragon blocks one attack, or spell, or anything as any immediate action and is 2nd level. Which is completely nuts of course, I wouldn't allow that for anything less than 4th level and that's assuming the game won't go all the way to 9th level spells (by which point you could toss out 4ths as easily as 2nds).

The second version is obviously more powerful and should be worth at least +2 levels, if it's even appropriate at all.

Wings of Cover only gets away with existing when it does because everyone's using it and no one cares that non-casters are underpowered. In 5e that's not supposed to be how it works and the spell shouldn't exist at all.

nonsi
2016-06-04, 06:26 PM
If it's 3.5 then this is a trick question: the spell already exists and is far from unknown. Wings of Cover from Races of the Dragon blocks one attack, or spell, or anything as any immediate action and is 2nd level. Which is completely nuts of course, I wouldn't allow that for anything less than 4th level and that's assuming the game won't go all the way to 9th level spells (by which point you could toss out 4ths as easily as 2nds).

The second version is obviously more powerful and should be worth at least +2 levels, if it's even appropriate at all.

Wings of Cover only gets away with existing when it does because everyone's using it and no one cares that non-casters are underpowered. In 5e that's not supposed to be how it works and the spell shouldn't exist at all.

I read RotD's Wings of Cover.
My suggestion is a lot more modest. The spell i'm suggesting is useless against any offensive action that doesn't require an attack roll. It also shields you in a 180-degrees, not all directions at once.

Fizban
2016-06-05, 02:41 AM
The majority of monsters rely on attack rolls, and the best attack spells all rely on attack rolls. While an attack roll only version is technically weaker, in practice it only matters against breath weapons and casters or SLA "caster" mobs. If casters every day is actually how you roll then I could see dropping the level by 1, but I'd still put the starting level above the printed 2. 4-1=3rd, the next best comparison I have for 3rd is Alter Fortune. It can be used to reroll a save or attack for one creature (even an enemy), but also costs 200xp per shot.

Even if the second only blocks a 180 arc it's still total cover for a full round of effects against at least one person, which includes all non-spread spells. It blocks the full full attack instead of just one hit, as well as anyone who can't get around the side-and as a caster you have the most ability to attack from a range where people will have no chance of reaching your back.

Really there's only one question to ask: are you fine with every person capable of casting this spell casting it every round of every fight that even remotely matters? Do you want you casters to be functionally immune against single foes? Even 3rd level wands are pretty cheap, immediate action spells need to have high costs. The lower level you want it to be, the more that indicates that it needs to be a higher level. 1st level immediate action spells: Feather Fall and Deep Breath. That's protection from sudden environmental hazards, not things actively trying to kill you.

If you really want to make it a thing, I'd suggest making it an actual wall. With hit points based on caster level and everything. Full attackers will smash the barrier in one or two hits, burst spells might be blocked if the wall can soak their damage but the hit points are set so that's 50/50 at even cl. The wanded version is still ridiculously good as it blocks all non-damaging effects without fail but at least the hp would be low enough that damage dealers aren't hosed by the spell's very existence.

Wulfskadi
2016-06-07, 12:53 PM
Back to the idea of using this in 5e

a spell similar to this already exists, shield: abjuration 1st level, casting time: 1 reaction effect: cast after being targeted by an attack that uses an attack roll, you gain a +5 to AC until the start of your next turn, possibly causing the triggering attack to miss. (also immunity to magic missile)


If you're going to make a full cover spell it should be 2nd or third level. However expending higher spell slots like that to gain immunity from one attack is kind of a stupid move. It would make more sense to make it able to target a wider range of creatures, possibly a whole party, from a single area of effect attack.

nonsi
2016-06-07, 02:42 PM
The majority of monsters rely on attack rolls, and the best attack spells all rely on attack rolls. While an attack roll only version is technically weaker, in practice it only matters against breath weapons and casters or SLA "caster" mobs. If casters every day is actually how you roll then I could see dropping the level by 1, but I'd still put the starting level above the printed 2. 4-1=3rd, the next best comparison I have for 3rd is Alter Fortune. It can be used to reroll a save or attack for one creature (even an enemy), but also costs 200xp per shot.

Even if the second only blocks a 180 arc it's still total cover for a full round of effects against at least one person, which includes all non-spread spells. It blocks the full full attack instead of just one hit, as well as anyone who can't get around the side-and as a caster you have the most ability to attack from a range where people will have no chance of reaching your back.

Really there's only one question to ask: are you fine with every person capable of casting this spell casting it every round of every fight that even remotely matters? Do you want you casters to be functionally immune against single foes? Even 3rd level wands are pretty cheap, immediate action spells need to have high costs. The lower level you want it to be, the more that indicates that it needs to be a higher level. 1st level immediate action spells: Feather Fall and Deep Breath. That's protection from sudden environmental hazards, not things actively trying to kill you.

If you really want to make it a thing, I'd suggest making it an actual wall. With hit points based on caster level and everything. Full attackers will smash the barrier in one or two hits, burst spells might be blocked if the wall can soak their damage but the hit points are set so that's 50/50 at even cl. The wanded version is still ridiculously good as it blocks all non-damaging effects without fail but at least the hp would be low enough that damage dealers aren't hosed by the spell's very existence.


3rd level it is then.


Preemptive Shield
Evocation
Level: Wiz/Sorc 3
Components: S
Casting Time: immediate action
Range: personal
Duration: see below
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
This spell creates a translucent force shield. The shield grants the caster total cover vs. a single offensive action the caster is aware of that requires an attack roll.
The shield is non-conductive to heat, electricity, and concussion/vibration, thus it provides partial protection vs. certain energy attacks as well. Using this spell, the caster may gain +5 on her Ref save, as well as Energy Resistance 20 vs. a cone-shaped or a line-shaped energy-based attack or a burst/spread spell with a focal point (such as Fireball), provided their focal point is in front of the shield.
The shield is translucent and finite in size, so its scope of protection is limited:
- The caster is affected as normal by the Bull Rush maneuver.
- Swallow whole attacks would not cause initial damage, but on a successful hit the caster does get swallowed.
- Light-based damage and effects (such as from the Searing Light spell) completely ignore the shield generated by this spell.

Fizban
2016-06-09, 02:48 AM
provided their focal point is in front of the shield.
Implies that the spell is directional when it currently has no direction.

Energy Resistance 20 vs. cone-shaped or line-shaped energy-based attacks, and vs. blast spells (such as Fireball)
Energy Aegis (PHB2, same as Alter Fortune) is 3rd level and provides resistance 20 against one type for one round (also useable on other people), which I imagine is where you got the number. This line could be read to imply that the spell lasts for more than one effect. Fireball and most other spherical AoEs are actually spreads.

The shield is translucent and finite in size,
I get where you're going with the vagueness to avoid invoking the actual cover rules, but the size wouldn't have anything to do with the rest either.

- The caster is affected as normal by the Bull Rush maneuver.
- Swallow whole attacks would not cause initial damage, but on a successful hit the caster does get swallowed.
- Light-based damage and effects (such as from the Searing Light spell) completely ignore the shield generated by this spell.
What you actually want to say is that the spell blocks the initial damage or similar effect (such as spell delivery) on a hit, but does not negate the hit itself. Thus all combat maneuvers/improved grabs/trips/whatevers continue as normal. Some effects such as injury poison which specify damage must be dealt will fail, but bull rushing and swallow whole-ing won't. The light bit is nice, light spells are cool but have little reason to see play and this gives them a significant use in your game.

nonsi
2016-06-09, 11:09 AM
Implies that the spell is directional when it currently has no direction.


Got it.





Energy Aegis (PHB2, same as Alter Fortune) is 3rd level and provides resistance 20 against one type for one round (also useable on other people), which I imagine is where you got the number. This line could be read to imply that the spell lasts for more than one effect. Fireball and most other spherical AoEs are actually spreads.


Re-worded for clarification.





I get where you're going with the vagueness to avoid invoking the actual cover rules, but the size wouldn't have anything to do with the rest either.


I figured it does, if I'm to explain why Swallow Whole remains an option.





What you actually want to say is that the spell blocks the initial damage or similar effect (such as spell delivery) on a hit, but does not negate the hit itself. Thus all combat maneuvers/improved grabs/trips/whatevers continue as normal. Some effects such as injury poison which specify damage must be dealt will fail, but bull rushing and swallow whole-ing won't. The light bit is nice, light spells are cool but have little reason to see play and this gives them a significant use in your game.


I'm not sure about Trip/Grab/Overrun, because the attack doesn't connect (but a specialized feat that would allow a follow-up Trip after a successful bull rush should work).

Fizban
2016-06-11, 04:24 AM
I'm not sure about Trip/Grab/Overrun, because the attack doesn't connect (but a specialized feat that would allow a follow-up Trip after a successful bull rush should work).
My non-specific wording has the effect lasting only long enough to block damage. If you specifically want to allow only bull rush and swallow whole then you can just do it that way, but if the effect completely blocks a weapon why can't it completely block the grab for a bull rush? That's a standard action with a single touch attack, should be completely blocked.

Your understanding of Swallow Whole seems to be incomplete: there's no such thing as a Swallow Whole attack. What actually happens is an attack followed by Improved Grab just like anything else from a giant scorpion to a dire lion, except if a creature who has Swallow Whole starts their turn grappling you they can roll a grapple check to swallow. In order for Swallow Whole to work past the shield it has to allow Improved Grapple, unless what you mean to say is that using the shield while grappled can prevent other grapple maneuvers but not Swallow Whole. Which doesn't make sense either since it would mean you could stop them from dragging or gagging you but not swallowing you. So all of that in mind, I think my way is easier: the spell blocks damage but you're still hit and other stuff will trigger.

nonsi
2016-06-11, 07:47 AM
My non-specific wording has the effect lasting only long enough to block damage. If you specifically want to allow only bull rush and swallow whole then you can just do it that way, but if the effect completely blocks a weapon why can't it completely block the grab for a bull rush? That's a standard action with a single touch attack, should be completely blocked.

Your understanding of Swallow Whole seems to be incomplete: there's no such thing as a Swallow Whole attack. What actually happens is an attack followed by Improved Grab just like anything else from a giant scorpion to a dire lion, except if a creature who has Swallow Whole starts their turn grappling you they can roll a grapple check to swallow. In order for Swallow Whole to work past the shield it has to allow Improved Grapple, unless what you mean to say is that using the shield while grappled can prevent other grapple maneuvers but not Swallow Whole. Which doesn't make sense either since it would mean you could stop them from dragging or gagging you but not swallowing you. So all of that in mind, I think my way is easier: the spell blocks damage but you're still hit and other stuff will trigger.

That's acceptable by me. How would you phrase it in a sentence or two?

Fizban
2016-06-12, 05:19 AM
This spell creates a translucent force shield which blocks a single hostile action involving either an attack roll or area of effect that allows a reflex save, somewhat as if the caster had total cover for that brief instant. The spell must be cast after an attack or effect is announced, but before any attacks or saves are rolled. "If used in response to an attack, the initial damage or magical effect (such as spell delivery) of that roll is negated even if the attack hits. The caster still counts as hit by the attack, so other effects which don't care about the initial damage/magic continue as normal (such as combat maneuvers)." If used in response to an area of effect allowing a reflex save, the spell provides a +5 bonus on the save and absorbs energy damage, granting Energy Resistance 20 against all energy types used in the effect.

Being translucent, the barrier does not block light, and this extends to it's protection as well: light-based spells and effects ignore it completely, including but not limited to those with the [light] descriptor.


It's really annoying trying to use the word "effect" since it's not actually defined anywhere and can be taken as including the "you've grabbed on" "effect" of rolling touch to grapple or rush. I ended up using even more words trying to keep things clear but I think it gets the full intent across. Would have used "initial damage and magical effect," but that might allow some spell like Kelpstrand to get a partial success (spells are all over the place, the difference between effects and deliveries and targets gets muddy fast).

nonsi
2016-06-12, 07:18 AM
This spell creates a translucent force shield which blocks a single hostile action involving either an attack roll or area of effect that allows a reflex save, somewhat as if the caster had total cover for that brief instant. The spell must be cast after an attack or effect is announced, but before any attacks or saves are rolled. "If used in response to an attack, the initial damage or magical effect (such as spell delivery) of that roll is negated even if the attack hits. The caster still counts as hit by the attack, so other effects which don't care about the initial damage/magic continue as normal (such as combat maneuvers)." If used in response to an area of effect allowing a reflex save, the spell provides a +5 bonus on the save and absorbs energy damage, granting Energy Resistance 20 against all energy types used in the effect.

Being translucent, the barrier does not block light, and this extends to it's protection as well: light-based spells and effects ignore it completely, including but not limited to those with the [light] descriptor.


It's really annoying trying to use the word "effect" since it's not actually defined anywhere and can be taken as including the "you've grabbed on" "effect" of rolling touch to grapple or rush. I ended up using even more words trying to keep things clear but I think it gets the full intent across. Would have used "initial damage and magical effect," but that might allow some spell like Kelpstrand to get a partial success (spells are all over the place, the difference between effects and deliveries and targets gets muddy fast).


A bit more than a sentence or two, but I'm guessing I'm not gonna have anything more accurate than this.
Thanks :smallcool:

Darth Ultron
2016-06-12, 01:08 PM
This should be a [Force] spell, right?

And why Evocation? Sure sounds like an Abjuration....

Sith_Happens
2016-06-12, 01:59 PM
3rd level it is then.

Um... Not really. Regardless of what you think of Wings of Cover, if this spell is going to exist in the same edition as that one then it can't be both weaker and higher level. It could, however, be the same level (2nd); the main "drawback" of Wings of Cover is that it's exclusive to Sorcerers while Preemptive Shield is usable by Wizards as well, which seems a fair trade-off.


This should be a [Force] spell, right?

And why Evocation? Sure sounds like an Abjuration....

The vast majority of [Force] spells are Evocation, including ones that create barriers.

nonsi
2016-06-14, 03:01 AM
Um... Not really. Regardless of what you think of Wings of Cover, if this spell is going to exist in the same edition as that one then it can't be both weaker and higher level. It could, however, be the same level (2nd); the main "drawback" of Wings of Cover is that it's exclusive to Sorcerers while Preemptive Shield is usable by Wizards as well, which seems a fair trade-off.



The vast majority of [Force] spells are Evocation, including ones that create barriers.

Point taken. Thanks.