3rd Ed Evocation as Meta-Spells [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

View Full Version : 3rd Ed Evocation as Meta-Spells

Nifft

2017-10-05, 11:22 AM

Cosi

2017-10-05, 11:38 AM

Psyren

2017-10-05, 12:38 PM

I'd rather do the opposite and move these "metaspells" into Universal, myself. Every wizard past a certain level should have access to Contingency, it's as vital to their survival as being able to Read Magic. It fits thematically too - Contingency manipulates energy (an Evocation trait) but it's also capable of reading conditions before they happen (a Divination trait) and protecting the caster (an Abjuration trait.) So I think Universal is the best place for it.

If you want to make Evocation more attractive, I think the way to go is not to put effects there that every wizard will need - rather, I think the way to go is making Evocation the best at the things it's supposed to be the best at. A conjurer should not be capable of out-blasting an Evoker, and hit point damage should apply useful effects before reaching the last one.

Elder_Basilisk

2017-10-05, 12:51 PM

Evocation spells are meta spells in a different way already: their usefulness varies dramatically depending upon the dm's encounter creations which is analogous to the metagame in rts and other competitive strategy circles.

Single big bad enemies? Fireball doesn't hold a candle to haste. But if the encounter is three hell hounds, four goblin ranger 2s on worgs, a level 3 luring cavalier with volley fire and tactician, a level 5 bard with a scrolls of haste and good hope, and twelve second level hobgoblin fighters with rapid shot and fireball looks a whole lot better.

There's still the issue with blast of flame and other conjuration "I swear it's not an evocation, honest" spells in 3.5 but deal with that (as Pathfinder did) and evocation is a highly useful school depending on the encounter metagame.

Mike Miller

2017-10-05, 03:27 PM

lord_khaine

2017-10-05, 04:42 PM

I'd rather do the opposite and move these "metaspells" into Universal, myself. Every wizard past a certain level should have access to Contingency, it's as vital to their survival as being able to Read Magic. It fits thematically too - Contingency manipulates energy (an Evocation trait) but it's also capable of reading conditions before they happen (a Divination trait) and protecting the caster (an Abjuration trait.) So I think Universal is the best place for it.

I kinda disagree with this. Contingency is one of the main sources for a Wizards ability to ignore normal game rules, and act out of turn. I dont think its something that should be easily available. my preference would be to move it up to level 8 or 9, ban it, or limit it to evocation specialist. I certainly dont think it should be given to everyone.

Psyren

2017-10-05, 04:47 PM

I kinda disagree with this. Contingency is one of the main sources for a Wizards ability to ignore normal game rules, and act out of turn. I dont think its something that should be easily available. my preference would be to move it up to level 8 or 9, ban it, or limit it to evocation specialist. I certainly dont think it should be given to everyone.

Contingency isn't broken, it's Craft Contingent Spell that's broken. Every Wizard having one (and only one) contingency is fine.

Nifft

2017-10-05, 06:19 PM

I think if you're doing this, you might consider moving dispel magic and/or detect magic (plus the higher level variants of those) into evocation. They're not exactly "metaspells" as you've described them, but they definitely fall under the category of "magic about magic".

This idea also dovetails nicely with the reliance of evocation specialist on metamagic. You could potentially do something with that (perhaps a line of switf-action evocations to add a metamagic effect to your next spell). That's probably a good next step.

For now, I want to identify the existing Meta-Spells that fit naturally into Evocation.

Regarding dispel magic -- IMHO the secondary dispel-type spells would be a better fit (stuff like wall of dispel magic which creates a temporary hazard like a wall of fire, or the two mentioned above). I could see a case for dispel magic itself, but I don't want to neuter Abjuration too much.

Hmm, maybe a new Evocation counter-spell which costs an Immediate action. Disrupting Flare or something.

I'd rather do the opposite and move these "metaspells" into Universal, myself. That's a terrible idea because that would make banning Evocation even more of a no-brainer than it already is.

I mean, unless your goal is to make banning Evocation even more of a no-brainer.

But that seems like a poor choice for a goal.

I think the way to go is making Evocation the best at the things it's supposed to be the best at. A conjurer should not be capable of out-blasting an Evoker, and hit point damage should apply useful effects before reaching the last one. Those could be cut down, yeah, but Conjuration ought to have a few ways to deal damage (just as Necromancy does).

Probably not as many as it currently has, but a few at least.

The Core proportions were probably okay: weaker spells on par with Melf's Acid Arrow.

Evocation spells are meta spells in a different way already: their usefulness varies dramatically depending upon the dm's encounter creations which is analogous to the metagame in rts and other competitive strategy circles.

Single big bad enemies? Fireball doesn't hold a candle to haste. But if the encounter is three hell hounds, four goblin ranger 2s on worgs, a level 3 luring cavalier with volley fire and tactician, a level 5 bard with a scrolls of haste and good hope, and twelve second level hobgoblin fighters with rapid shot and fireball looks a whole lot better.

There's still the issue with blast of flame and other conjuration "I swear it's not an evocation, honest" spells in 3.5 but deal with that (as Pathfinder did) and evocation is a highly useful school depending on the encounter metagame. Well... I mean, that's technically true, but it's a different use of the prefix "meta", and it's not specific to Evocation. Every school can wax or wane in significance based on the metagame.

But that's almost totally different from what this thread is about.

I kinda disagree with this. Contingency is one of the main sources for a Wizards ability to ignore normal game rules, and act out of turn. I dont think its something that should be easily available. my preference would be to move it up to level 8 or 9, ban it, or limit it to evocation specialist. I certainly dont think it should be given to everyone.
Yes, this is what I'm aiming for.

IMHO if you give up a school of magic, it ought to hurt. Ideally all schools would hurt in roughly equal proportion, but just making sure that every school imposed a notable cost would be a step forward.

Thanks!

Psyren

2017-10-05, 07:02 PM

That's a terrible idea because that would make banning Evocation even more of a no-brainer than it already is.

I mean, unless your goal is to make banning Evocation even more of a no-brainer.

But that seems like a poor choice for a goal.

I can tell you read the rest of my post because you responded to it, but it seems you didn't before typing this bit and then just left it as-is.

The "goal" is to make Evocation attractive without cramming a small handful of must-have spells in it and leaving the other 90% of it as hot garbage.

Those could be cut down, yeah, but Conjuration ought to have a few ways to deal damage (just as Necromancy does).

Probably not as many as it currently has, but a few at least.

The Core proportions were probably okay: weaker spells on par with Melf's Acid Arrow.

That's what I'm saying though - it's not the number of ways I have an issue with, it's their effectiveness. For example, Orb of Fire's whole deal is that you're attacking with nonmagical fire - this is the reason that it works in an AMF and ignores SR, after all. Nonmagical fire should not be doing 1d6/level and outclassing the likes of Scorching Ray, and the same is true for all of them. Something more like 1d6/2 levels, or making it harder to apply metamagic to conjurations than to evocations, would be more appropriate in my mind.

Combine that with the second part I mentioned, i.e. making hp damage matter much more than it currently does, such that "the HP damage school" is actually one you might want your caster to specialize in.

Cosi

2017-10-05, 07:13 PM

There shouldn't be any must-have spells. If a selectable ability is always selected, it is either too good (and therefore should be nerfed), or mandatory (and therefore should be free). If contingency genuinely is something every Wizard is required to take in order to survive, making it trade off with other spells just creates the potential for people playing characters that can't survive and makes Wizards less interesting.

Regarding dispel magic -- IMHO the secondary dispel-type spells would be a better fit (stuff like wall of dispel magic which creates a temporary hazard like a wall of fire, or the two mentioned above). I could see a case for dispel magic itself, but I don't want to neuter Abjuration too much.

I think having the base version in a different school for the variants is weird enough to try to avoid. At risk of broadening the project, I'd rather respond by making the wall of X line of spells Abjuration.

Nifft

2017-10-05, 07:15 PM

I can tell you read the rest of my post because you responded to it, but it seems you didn't before typing this bit and then just left it as-is.

You posted two different ideas.

One was terrible ("remove the one really good Evocation and make it Universal"), the other was decent but also not particularly related to the topic of this thread.

I responded to your two ideas separately. Hopefully you now understand the reply.

Thanks for trying to help.

There shouldn't be any must-have spells. If a selectable ability is always selected, it is either too good (and therefore should be nerfed), or mandatory (and therefore should be free). If contingency genuinely is something every Wizard is required to take in order to survive, making it trade off with other spells just creates the potential for people playing characters that can't survive and makes Wizards less interesting. I don't think any particular spell is must-have.

But I do think some are better than others, and some schools have too many of the best ones -- while other schools have far too few.

I think having the base version in a different school for the variants is weird enough to try to avoid. At risk of broadening the project, I'd rather respond by making the wall of X line of spells Abjuration.

I'm advocating dual-school, so the wall of dispel magic would also be Abjuration.

You'd lose it by banning Evocation or Abjuration, since it's in both.

Psyren

2017-10-05, 08:09 PM

You posted two different ideas.

One was terrible ("remove the one really good Evocation and make it Universal"), the other was decent but also not particularly related to the topic of this thread.

I responded to your two ideas separately. Hopefully you now understand the reply.

Thanks for trying to help.

The problem the thread is trying to solve is that Evocation is generally overlooked in favor of Conjuration. So my answer (which is two halves of a single whole actually, not two separate answers) is indeed relevant to the thread. (1) Make evocation's main schtick better, and (2) Make conjuration's ability to usurp that schtick worse.

Your goal is sound ("Make evocation worthwhile") but the means proposed to get there is terrible ("let 90% of evocation remain awful/still overshadowed by Conjuration, but force people to go to it for the few utility spells they want.") Therefore my answer to your specific question ("what spells to move to Evocation") was mu, "the question is wrong."

Zanos

2017-10-05, 09:36 PM

Why not move universal into evocation instead? Miracle, also known as "Divine Wish" is in Evocation. Manipulating energy is a general enough concept that I think most of the printed universal spells fit into it.

Nifft

2017-10-05, 09:58 PM

The problem the thread is trying to solve is that Evocation is generally overlooked

Period, full stop. Evocation is generally overlooked.

Evocation is often banned without regret, except for spells like contingency which are regretted.

Emphasizing and filling out the aspects of Evocation which are worth having (specifically the Meta-Spell aspects) is the purpose of this thread.

You're misunderstanding if you think Conjuration is the only culprit. I hope this clears things up for you. Again, thanks for trying to help -- albeit by attempting to undermine the thread and dismiss the topic, but still I think you're trying your best, and thanks for that effort.

Why not move universal into evocation instead? Miracle, also known as "Divine Wish" is in Evocation. Manipulating energy is a general enough concept that I think most of the printed universal spells fit into it.
That's a really interesting idea.

Wish is on par with Gate and Shapechange, so making it school-specific might be reasonable.

(Shadowcraft Mage would need one less feat to break the world... that's probably not a factor worthy of consideration, though.)

Some of the spells that I'm proposing moving are Universal; but some spells like Permanency seem more like class-features disguised as spells which genuinely do need to be available to all Wizards. I don't see any others on par with Permanency, aside from Sorcerer-only spells like the arcane fusion pair.

===== ===== =====

Anyway, the updated spell list:

Evocation:
- Mystic Surge (PHB2) -- currently Universal
- Spell Enhancer (SpC) -- currently Transmutation
- Suffer the Flesh (Magic of Eberron) -- currently Transmutation
- Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer (SRD) -- currently Transmutation
- Rary's Arcane Conversion (C.Mage) -- currently Universal
- Arcane Spellsurge (Dragon Magic) -- currently Universal
- Field of Resistance (PHB2) -- currently Abjuration
- (Lesser/Greater) Celerity (SpC) -- currently Transmutation
- Wand Modulation (C.Sco) -- currently Transmutation
- True Casting (C.Mage) -- currently Divination -- note the overlap with Assay Spell Resistance (SpC) which remains Divination
- Mordenkainen's Lucubration (SRD) -- currently Transmutation, unlike most of Mordenkainen's spells

Dual School which includes Evocation:
- Arcane Turmoil (C.Mage) -- Abjuration / Evocation
- Reaving Dispel (SpC) -- Abjuration / Evocation
- Wall of Dispel Magic (SpC) -- Abjuration / Evocation
- Reverse Gravity (SRD) -- Evocation / Transmutation
- Time Stop (SRD) -- Evocation / Transmutation

Celerity spells are functionally similar to contingency in that you get to act out-of-order. They could be flavored as a manipulation of temporal energy, which fits the spell text, and would put them squarely in Evocation. Time Stop can be justified on similar grounds, though it's also got strong ties to haste, and thus it's a better candidate for being dual-school -- you're both speeding yourself up and manipulating time-energy, which is why you don't behave quite like a sped-up character would.

Psyren

2017-10-05, 11:24 PM

I hope this clears things up for you. Again, thanks for trying to help -- albeit by attempting to undermine the thread and dismiss the topic, but still I think you're trying your best, and thanks for that effort.

I am on topic. You're the one trying to dismiss anything but blind agreement with your premise as being off-topic. But whatever, I have better things to do.

Nifft

2017-10-06, 11:28 AM

I'd rather do the opposite

I am on topic.

The opposite of a topic is actually not the same thing as the topic.

dismiss anything but blind agreement

There have been a lot of good ideas in this thread, and basically everyone except you seems able to participate in good faith.

So you're calling everyone in the thread (except yourself) "blind" in retaliation?

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Cosi

2017-10-06, 11:36 AM

But I do think some are better than others, and some schools have too many of the best ones -- while other schools have far too few.

I agree, my issue is that Psyren is being an idiot.

I'm advocating dual-school, so the wall of dispel magic would also be Abjuration.

You'd lose it by banning Evocation or Abjuration, since it's in both.

I'm not a fan of the idea of dual-school spells. It's an added level of complexity for a fairly marginal benefit (you make specialists slightly weaker, and also buff some feats that are very rarely taken on merits). There's also the issue that mostly spells aren't designed with dual-school in mind, which means that there are a lot of things that seem like they are (or should be) Abjuration/Divination or whatever but aren't, which amplifies the complexity problem. I would rather keep things to one school, and let ambiguous cases live on one side or the other, particularly because 90%+ of the time it's not a relevant distinction.

Nifft

2017-10-06, 11:53 AM

I agree, my issue is that Psyren is being an idiot. Ah my misunderstanding then.

I'm not a fan of the idea of dual-school spells. It's an added level of complexity for a fairly marginal benefit (you make specialists slightly weaker, and also buff some feats that are very rarely taken on merits). There's also the issue that mostly spells aren't designed with dual-school in mind, which means that there are a lot of things that seem like they are (or should be) Abjuration/Divination or whatever but aren't, which amplifies the complexity problem. I would rather keep things to one school, and let ambiguous cases live on one side or the other, particularly because 90%+ of the time it's not a relevant distinction.

Hmm, I guess you're right that dual-school is not as elegant, but it is a tool in the box and this might be a valid use for it.

On the other hand, moving Dispel Magic (et al.) into Evocation is basically what Kineticist did, and it worked fine.

There would have to be a reasonably easy to understand "bright line" between dispelling / disrupting spell energies vs. Abjuration effects that guard against spell effects.

Cosi

2017-10-06, 11:57 AM

There would have to be a reasonably easy to understand "bright line" between dispelling / disrupting spell energies vs. Abjuration effects that guard against spell effects.

It seems like persistent effects might be a reasonable line. So antimagic field is Abjuration, but dispel magic is Evocation. Honestly though, setting down proper lines probably ends up with having to re-school (or at least check) almost every published spell. Probably better to just give Evocation "stuff" until we're happy with where it is.

Thurbane

2017-10-10, 04:45 PM

This is definitely an interesting idea, and would certainly make Evocation more appealing...

The Viscount

2017-10-11, 10:47 PM

It's difficult to explain spells that affect other magic as evocation, because abjuration already has so many spells that affect magic, even offensively like dispel magic. There's definitely some excess that could be carved from Transmutation.

If you're concerned about the viability of evocation, and preventing banning, you must deal with Shadow Evocation and the Greater form. Greater Shadow Evocation can duplicate contingency, so there isn't really a regret for banning.

lbuttitta

2017-10-12, 06:55 AM

The Evocation school has a well-earned reputation for being easily discarded.

One of the few spells that people actually regret losing is Contingency; another is Invoke Magic.

Both of these are Meta-Spell spells: they're spells about other spells. I think that Meta-Spells might be a valid category to explicitly include under Evocation, just as Teleporation / Creation / Calling / Summoning are all under Conjuration.

Looking over the Metaspell Handbook (http://minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=10885), I see a few more spells-about-spells (like Contingency) and spells-about-magical-energy (like Invoke Magic) which could plausibly be brought over to Evocation.

A few examples:
- Mystic Surge (PHB2) -- currently Universal
- Rary's Mnemonic Enhancer (SRD) -- currently Transmutation
- Arcane Spellsurge (Dragon Magic) -- currently Universal

Evocation could be added to some spells which manipulate fundamental forces, making those spells dual-school.

Dual-school ideas:
- Arcane Turmoil (C.Mage) and Reaving Dispel (SpC) -- currently Abjuration, make them Abjuration/Evocation, following the example of Slashing Dispel (PHB2).
- Reverse Gravity (SRD) -- currently Transmutation

Thoughts?

Which spells could be moved from Universal or from other schools into Evocation?
I agree with Psyren, not in terms of game balance (of which I see no mention in your first post, quoted above) but in terms of thematics.
What does launching a fireball have to do with setting up a carefully calibrated spell matrix to cast a spell for you at a specified condition? To me, anyway, the answer is "nothing", or, if you want to get smart-alecky, "they're both spells".
Thence, I conclude that, since these "evocation" spells do not seem particularly evocative (pardon the pun), they should be moved to Universal.

Evocation is often banned without regret, except for spells like contingency which are regretted.

Emphasizing and filling out the aspects of Evocation which are worth having (specifically the Meta-Spell aspects) is the purpose of this thread.
You're restricting the possible solutions to the problem you propose to your own, when there's a far more intuitive solution available (and, to my mind, one that maintains the current system of eight spell schools).
It seems like contingency fits more nicely, thematically, into Universal. So, given the definition of Evocation as a spell school of damage-dealing spells because of which contingency was moved into Universal, it seems reasonable to remove many, if not all, of the damage-dealing spells from schools like Conjuration into Evocation. Thus, we maintain our system of clearly defined spell schools, and we make Evocation a school worth actually not prohibiting.

lbuttitta

2017-10-12, 07:14 AM

I'd rather do the opposite

I am on topic.

The opposite of a topic is actually not the same thing as the topic.

There have been a lot of good ideas in this thread, and basically everyone except you seems able to participate in good faith.

So you're calling everyone in the thread (except yourself) "blind" in retaliation?

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

You're invoking a logical fallacy called Out-of-Context Quoting. Here, you omitted the fact that what Psyren was actually saying, and I quote, was, "I'd rather do the opposite and move these metaspells into Universal, myself ... I am on topic." And I disagree with your statement that "everyone except you" seems able to participate in good faith. I would say that a large minority, if not a majority, disagree with your proposed solution.
Further, what exactly are you defining "topic" as?
If the answer, as I gleaned from your posts, was "making Evocation a playable school", then the suggestions of Psyren and I are not, in fact, outside the scope of this thread.
I don't mean to be argumentative, though. If the answer is "getting a list of meta-spells", then here are some I didn't see on your list:

Wish/miracle, limited wish, etc.
Energy transformation field
Spell matrix, lesser spell matrix, greater spell matrix

Cosi

2017-10-12, 10:30 AM

If you're concerned about the viability of evocation, and preventing banning, you must deal with Shadow Evocation and the Greater form. Greater Shadow Evocation can duplicate contingency, so there isn't really a regret for banning.

I agree, but that's a separate issue. You could nuke shadow evocation entirely, and the school would still be bad enough that people would ban it. The issue is that direct damage just isn't good, and contigency isn't necessary enough to justify loosing sleep, magic jar, shadow conjuration, polymorph, planar binding, or magic circle.

What does launching a fireball have to do with setting up a carefully calibrated spell matrix to cast a spell for you at a specified condition? To me, anyway, the answer is "nothing", or, if you want to get smart-alecky, "they're both spells".

The problem here is that we do not have a coherent metaphysics for what "doing magic" is. Nifft is coming from a position that says magic is "manipulating energy", and that Evocation's focus on energy would make it the school for spells that modify that. His position isn't unreasonable, it's just that the game's model of magic is sufficiently incomplete to make it hard to adjudicate whether magic is energy, or a pattern, or something else.

You're restricting the possible solutions to the problem you propose to your own, when there's a far more intuitive solution available (and, to my mind, one that maintains the current system of eight spell schools).
It seems like contingency fits more nicely, thematically, into Universal. So, given the definition of Evocation as a spell school of damage-dealing spells because of which contingency was moved into Universal, it seems reasonable to remove many, if not all, of the damage-dealing spells from schools like Conjuration into Evocation. Thus, we maintain our system of clearly defined spell schools, and we make Evocation a school worth actually not prohibiting.

No we don't. Direct damage is bad. Even if you want to do direct damage, you're largely going to be better off buffing the parties DPS characters (be the DMM Clerics, Fighters, Bardblades, or something else). If you wanted to make Evocation viable as the direct damage school, you would have to make direct damage viable.

You're invoking a logical fallacy called Out-of-Context Quoting.

That's not really a "fallacy". It's just a "bad argument".

Nifft

2017-10-12, 01:50 PM

It seems like persistent effects might be a reasonable line. So antimagic field is Abjuration, but dispel magic is Evocation. Honestly though, setting down proper lines probably ends up with having to re-school (or at least check) almost every published spell. Probably better to just give Evocation "stuff" until we're happy with where it is. You're right, but for me having broad guidelines is a help.

You're restricting the possible solutions to the problem you propose to your own This thread's topic is the solution which I'm proposing.

You can check the thread's title for confirmation of that.

It seems like contingency fits more nicely, thematically, into Universal. Universal is NOT a school.

A small number of spells (arcane mark, limited wish, permanency, prestidigitation, and wish) are universal, belonging to no school.

That's the entire definition of universal spells.

There is no theme in that group -- it's just stuff that they guaranteed every Wizard could access.

You've been misled.

I don't mean to be argumentative, though. If the answer is "getting a list of meta-spells", then here are some I didn't see on your list:

Wish/miracle, limited wish, etc.
Energy transformation field
Spell matrix, lesser spell matrix, greater spell matrix

Miracle is not on a Sorc/Wiz spell, of course.

Wish and Limited Wish are good ideas, and they both got some discussion up-thread.

Simbul's Spell Matrix was FR-specific -- it might be Transmutation for a good reason in that setting, just as Bigby's Hand spells were Evocation for a reason in Greyhawk. But yeah I don't have to care about that if I'm in a different setting.

Looking at the SpC versions, I think they're a good fit -- they're conceptually pretty close to Contingency.

Energy Transformation Field looks interesting, though it's also from Magic of Faerun, so I'm not that familiar with it -- looks kinda exploitable, though. They explicitly say that activating an Immovable Rod (an unlimited free action) generates 2 spell levels per button click. That's just free spells forever. Hmm, I'd probably not allow that in a game. But if I did, it could fit into Evocation.

Good call on those.

No we don't. Direct damage is bad. Even if you want to do direct damage, you're largely going to be better off buffing the parties DPS characters (be the DMM Clerics, Fighters, Bardblades, or something else). If you wanted to make Evocation viable as the direct damage school, you would have to make direct damage viable. Exactly.

Evocation isn't bad because Conjuration can also do some damage.

Evocation is bad because Conjuration can teleport, bind demons, control the battlefield, and (on the side, as an afterthought) also do some damage.

Evocation needs a strong list of not-damage things in order to be a competitive choice for specialist Wizards.

That's not really a "fallacy". It's just a "bad argument". Perhaps. How much brainpower am I required to put into dealing with a disruptive bad-faith poster?

Anyway.

Putting everything mentioned into Evocation would probably be overkill.

I think there are a couple different lists which could be taken.

Evocation spells manipulate energy or tap an unseen source of power to produce a desired end. In effect, they create something out of nothing. Many of these spells produce spectacular effects (...)

Spectacular Effects:
- Prestidigitation
- Limited Wish
- Wish

Tap Unseen Power:
- (Lesser/Greater) Spell Matrix (SpC)
- Mystic Surge (PHB2) -- currently Universal
- Spell Enhancer (SpC) -- currently Transmutation
- Arcane Spellsurge (Dragon Magic) -- currently Universal

Manipulate Energy:
- Dispel Ward (SpC)
- Arcane Turmoil (C.Mage)
- (Greater) Dispel Magic (SRD)
- Slashing Dispel (PHB2) -- currently dual-school, becomes pure Evocation
- Chain Dispel (PHB2)
- Mord's Disjunction (SRD)
- Reaving Dispel (SpC)

I could see one or two of the above groups fitting into Evocation, but not all three.

Which two are the best fits?

Or is there another group that should be considered?

Thanks!

Dr_Dinosaur

2017-10-21, 05:48 PM

I’d say “Tap Unseen Power” and “Manipulate Energy”