How much mitigation for epic spells/powers is too much?

[danielxcutter]

Using mitigation factors to reduce the DCs of epic spells or powers is often regarded as cheesy in large degrees - mostly because of Chain Gating Solars, or similar tactics.

So, how sane should mitigation be kept? I mean, you've got to reduce the DC somehow if you want to use it at all, considering how much developing one costs and how long it takes, but you don't want to make a big "I Win" button to press, not really.

Note: I'm mostly asking about degree honestly, though the amount of resources used is also a factor.

[redking]

Restrict mitigation to twice the character's ranks in spellcraft. Also never allow the mitigation to go below the base DC of the primary seed (no costless epic spells).

If you do that things don't get out of control, nor is it too nerfed.

[danielxcutter]

Restrict mitigation to twice the character's ranks in spellcraft. Also never allow the mitigation to go below the base DC of the primary seed (no costless epic spells).

If you do that things don't get out of control, nor is it too nerfed.

This seems not bad, but how did you come up with this rule of thumb? Curious.

[redking]

I would add that ritual casting should be revised. The idea that a non-epic spell slot (even 1st level!) could be able to contribute to an epic spell in a ritual seems absurd. Additional participants in an epic spell ritual should contribute epic slots.

[redking]

This seems not bad, but how did you come up with this rule of thumb? Curious.

I have been thinking about this for quite a while. Epic spellcasting isn't broken, it just needs some tweaks.

[Crake]

I have been thinking about this for quite a while. Epic spellcasting isn't broken, it just needs some tweaks.

That's an oberoni fallacy if I ever saw one.

[redking]

That's an oberoni fallacy if I ever saw one.

Haha - yes. Its flawed but fixable.

[mattie_p]

General rule, if you have to ask, it's too much.

[Jack_Simth]

Suggestion:
Mitigation affects the spellcraft DC after calculating development costs, not before. So that DC 10,000 spell that you mitigated down to 0? You can cast it without a roll, and development is easy, but it still costs 90,000,000 gp, 1,800 days, and 3,600,000 xp to develop.

[martixy]

All mitigation factors have limits. It's that one that doesn't where the abuse happens.

Therefore, I feel like the easiest fix is to simply place a limit on the number of ritual participants.

Let's call it 10.

That way a L1 slot can still contribute, but for serious epic spells you'll naturally gravitate to higher level participants, cuz their number is limited.

Or maybe you could call it no more than 10 non-epic participants. In a coherent setting that's plenty self-limiting, because epic spellcasters aren't likely to be found under every rock and tree.

[DarkSoul]

I have some additional restrictions based on the class of the caster, but I use a similar DC floor to Redking: The final spell DC can't go below the DC of the highest seed used in the spell. I use that rather than the primary seed idea to eliminate any ambiguity about what the "primary" seed for the spell is.

So in the spirit of the OP: anything that reduces the DC lower than that is too much mitigation.

I don't think restrictions on ritual casters are necessary; in fact I'd be willing to entertain the idea of ad-hoc mitigation for non-spellcasters whose only purpose is to soak up backlash damage or xp costs. Were I to use something like that I'd probably allow additional ritual participants equal to half the caster's ranks in spellcraft, rounded down of course. That way, as the caster grows in ability their ability to add more participants does too.

[Tvtyrant]

Using mitigation factors to reduce the DCs of epic spells or powers is often regarded as cheesy in large degrees - mostly because of Chain Gating Solars, or similar tactics.

So, how sane should mitigation be kept? I mean, you've got to reduce the DC somehow if you want to use it at all, considering how much developing one costs and how long it takes, but you don't want to make a big "I Win" button to press, not really.

Note: I'm mostly asking about degree honestly, though the amount of resources used is also a factor.

Even the designers couldn't follow the epic casting rules, many of the examples are in fact illegal. I would just have the player write down what they want and then haggle with them until it is acceptable rather than trying to use the rules.

[flappeercraft]

In a regular power campaign (which everyone who knows me, knows I don't play regular power campaigns) I would restrict mitigation to reducing no further than 2/3 of the spellcraft DC. 1/2 if the spell isn't too borked

[JNAProductions]

In a regular power campaign (which everyone who knows me, knows I don't play regular power campaigns) I would restrict mitigation to reducing no further than 2/3 of the spellcraft DC. 1/2 if the spell isn't too borked

In a regular power campaign, I'd say Epic Spellcasting should probably be totally ignored. :P