PDA

View Full Version : This spell really AREN'T supposed to be at that level...



Arakune
2007-11-11, 10:25 AM
I need help to list all the overpowered spells that should be epic instead of level X spell or should be at level Y spell instead.

So far: Time stop, Wish, Miracle are epic scale.

Other:????

Kurald Galain
2007-11-11, 10:29 AM
Celerity, Gate, and Shivering Touch.

Spiryt
2007-11-11, 10:42 AM
Fly. Do I need to say why?

Starbuck_II
2007-11-11, 11:33 AM
Power Word Pain. Disjunction. Polymorph Any Object?

Crow
2007-11-11, 11:38 AM
Power Word Pain. Disjunction. Polymorph Any Object?


Whoa, Disjunction?

It's just a really good Dispel Magic. Sure it can have some devastating effects, but it's not that bad. Most magical loot is going to be on the players and bad guys anyways, so it will get a saving throw, which at the level it gets used at, is pretty reasonable. If it could be used for counterspelling like Dispel Magic, then it'd be a beast.

Hzurr
2007-11-11, 11:40 AM
Hmm...is there an inside joke with the title I'm not getting?

Starbuck_II
2007-11-11, 11:52 AM
Whoa, Disjunction?

It's just a really good Dispel Magic. Sure it can have some devastating effects, but it's not that bad. Most magical loot is going to be on the players and bad guys anyways, so it will get a saving throw, which at the level it gets used at, is pretty reasonable. If it could be used for counterspelling like Dispel Magic, then it'd be a beast.


But it can't be counterspelled as Dispel Magic as an option. Only Dispel Magic can do that.

Non-Will save dudes: I'm look at you Fighter.
Will fail the save alot more times. That is bad because now he has wealth of a 7th level Fighter (assuming he saves versus at least 1 item; Tomes would still be in effect at least). Now he sucks compared to level 17-20 encounters.

Arakune
2007-11-11, 12:00 PM
Fly. Do I need to say why?

The problem with fly is that you don't have any limit of how high you can go (well, there is, but you need to do some math before, and that's boring).

A good fix should be:

Fly
Wis/Sor/Travel 3
Components: V, F/DF
Casting Time:1 standard action
Range:Touch
Target:Creature touched
Duration: 1 round/level
Saving Throw:Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance:Yes (harmless)

Creature touched can fly at a speed of 20 ft with perfect maneuverability, regardless of weight/armor, but can't fly higher than 60 ft. You can try to fly faster or fly higher, but it requires a Will check DC 18 + 1 for every extra 5ft in speed or altitude.

Focus: One white feater.

Improved Fly
Wis/Sor 5
Components: V, S
Casting Time:1 standard action
Range:Touch
Target:Creature touched
Duration: 1 minute/level
Saving Throw:Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance:Yes (harmless)

Creature touched can fly at a speed of 40 ft with perfect maneuverability, regardless of weight/armor, but can't fly higher than 120 ft. You can try to fly faster or fly higher, but it requires a Will check DC 25 + 1 for every extra 10ft in speed or altitude.

Now you can't hit the automatic-run button in early levels, and it's not that much weak either (but you can't cast it at early in the morning and have it until noon even if you are higher level)

Kurald Galain
2007-11-11, 12:14 PM
Non-Will save dudes: I'm look at you Fighter.
Will fail the save alot more times. ... Now he sucks compared to level 17-20 encounters.
Well, frankly, there are a lot of spells that (on a failed save) make a 20th-level whatever suck compared to 17-20th level encounters. Any death spell, for starters.


The problem with fly is that you don't have any limit of how high you can go (well, there is, but you need to do some math before, and that's boring).
Putting an invisible ceiling at 60 feet certainly fails my realism check.

I don't think the height is the problem with fly. Rather, the problems are (1) it obviates climbing, (2) it effectively obviates stealth, and (3) people can't reach you if you're more than a few meters off the floor.

Crow
2007-11-11, 12:47 PM
But it can't be counterspelled as Dispel Magic as an option. Only Dispel Magic can do that.

I'm aware of that. I stated that if you could use it like that, it would be amazing!

Mewtarthio
2007-11-11, 12:56 PM
Well, frankly, there are a lot of spells that (on a failed save) make a 20th-level whatever suck compared to 17-20th level encounters. Any death spell, for starters.

A death effect costs 10,000-25,000gp for the ressurection. A miscellaneous sucking effect costs absolutely nothing for the heal. A few improved effects cost you whatever it takes to get your CL boosted for remove curse. A disjunction costs you every single magic item you have on you that fails the Will save.

Renegade Paladin
2007-11-11, 01:15 PM
Fly. Do I need to say why?
Yeah, actually you do.

goat
2007-11-11, 01:22 PM
Putting an invisible ceiling at 60 feet certainly fails my realism check.

You're raising complaints of realism against a spell that lets you fly?

Really, if you want justification, it would be a repulsion force rather than a flying effect. You need to get a good will check to go higher because you're creating it through sheer willpower. This also lets you "fly" when you're on top of things because there's a solid surface underneath you, but not up vertical surfaces where there isn't.

JaxGaret
2007-11-11, 01:28 PM
Remember that Disjunction has its own built-in nerf:


Even artifacts are subject to disjunction, though there is only a 1% chance per caster level of actually affecting such powerful items. Additionally, if an artifact is destroyed, you must make a DC 25 Will save or permanently lose all spellcasting abilities. (These abilities cannot be recovered by mortal magic, not even miracle or wish.)

Note: Destroying artifacts is a dangerous business, and it is 95% likely to attract the attention of some powerful being who has an interest in or connection with the device.

You can't just go around Disjuncting everything in sight - you're probably going to get hosed at some point, by destroying artifacts along with sundry magic items (unless you have ways to get around auto-failing Will saves on a 1, I'm assuming your Will save is at least 24) and taking the enormous consequences - essentially, annihilation.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-11, 01:36 PM
You're raising complaints of realism against a spell that lets you fly?

Yes.

Realism doesn't have to mean that things work exactly the same as it does on our own world, it can also mean that a world or system it is logical and internally consistent. It's called suspension of disbelief.

Elves can be considered realistic. Underwater-living squirrels that eat elephants, breathe fire and can teleport... less so.

JaxGaret
2007-11-11, 01:56 PM
Elves can be considered realistic. Underwater-living squirrels that eat elephants, breathe fire and can teleport... less so.

Why is that less realistic?

AlterForm
2007-11-11, 02:00 PM
Why is that less realistic?

Maybe because it would look something like this:

(Big Pic, rated PG for minor doodled gore.)

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x38/MightyDraco/wtf.png

Arakune
2007-11-11, 02:11 PM
Well, frankly, there are a lot of spells that (on a failed save) make a 20th-level whatever suck compared to 17-20th level encounters. Any death spell, for starters.

Putting an invisible ceiling at 60 feet certainly fails my realism check.

I don't think the height is the problem with fly. Rather, the problems are (1) it obviates climbing, (2) it effectively obviates stealth, and (3) people can't reach you if you're more than a few meters off the floor.

You are flying, there is any thing more realistic than that :smallsigh: ?

In the description of the spell there aren't any explanation of how the spell actually work (you negate your gravity around you? magic 'hands' or 'wings' let you fly?), so we can give or take the 'ceiling' without much concern about your 'reality'.
These versions of fly are more like 'jumping without falling', and your safe range of the jump are this 'ceiling'. That doesn't mean you can't fly higher than that, it's just harder.

And, the point is, a fly spell that let you flight for A) 1 hour/level and B) at (hypothetically) any height, should be at least (with is, the entire point of this thread) 6th~7th level spell, and a 3rd level spell that can automatically give you the automatic-run button (cast fly, goes to 120ft min, laugh if you are high enough level and then leave). At least, with this 'ceiling' an low level wizard are not going to run that easily.

daggaz
2007-11-11, 02:25 PM
Yes.

Realism doesn't have to mean that things work exactly the same as it does on our own world, it can also mean that a world or system it is logical and internally consistent. It's called suspension of disbelief.

Elves can be considered realistic. Underwater-living squirrels that eat elephants, breathe fire and can teleport... less so.

So YOU'RE the one who stole my DMing notes for my next gaming session!

JaxGaret
2007-11-11, 02:26 PM
Maybe because it would look something like this:

(Big Pic, rated PG for minor doodled gore.)

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x38/MightyDraco/wtf.png


My only question is: how did the transporter platform get there? :smallsmile:

Morty
2007-11-11, 02:37 PM
Wind Wall. 3rd level spell that makes me effectively immune to a contingent of archers? Yes, please. Granted, the wall is immoblile, but it should be at least 4th level spell.

AstralFire
2007-11-11, 02:47 PM
Do all of you people complaining about fly run your games in the middle of open fields under the cover of night with no enemy archers or ranged casters?

Crow
2007-11-11, 02:51 PM
Remember that Disjunction has its own built-in nerf:



You can't just go around Disjuncting everything in sight - you're probably going to get hosed at some point, by destroying artifacts along with sundry magic items (unless you have ways to get around auto-failing Will saves on a 1, I'm assuming your Will save is at least 24) and taking the enormous consequences - essentially, annihilation.

I'm willing to take the risk. =) Right now I use it for debuffing and destroying "win-buttons", but I could see the potential of lighting one off in the midst of a horde of fighter-types. I overlooked that earlier, as usually the only time you want to cook one off is against higher-level spellcasters. One thing that could make a difference is this; Do items get only their wielder's base save, or modified save? If they get the modified save, then that isn't too hard to pump up even for fighter types. Another issue would be if the target had save-enhancing buffs. Do the items get the save the target had before the buff was dispelled, or after?

Anyhow, I just could never figure out why you can't counterspell with it like Dispel Magic (other than it doesn't say so...which is the biggest one). Both are instantaneous effects that end magical effects. One could presume that the intent is there for it to work that way, but I guess not. Using Disjunction in that manner would be far less destructive, and give you a way to stop certain win button combos before they start (right now, you can only do so in a reactionary manner...at least with this spell).

Mewtarthio
2007-11-11, 02:52 PM
Remember that Disjunction has its own built-in nerf:

You can't just go around Disjuncting everything in sight - you're probably going to get hosed at some point, by destroying artifacts along with sundry magic items (unless you have ways to get around auto-failing Will saves on a 1, I'm assuming your Will save is at least 24) and taking the enormous consequences - essentially, annihilation.

So, in order to beat Disjunction, you have to scatter artifacts liberally throughout your enemies' possessions? Disjunction can only be properly dealt with by threatening to permanently eliminate the player's only class feature?

Arakune
2007-11-11, 03:04 PM
Uhm... can we go back to the subject?

JaxGaret
2007-11-11, 03:06 PM
So, in order to beat Disjunction, you have to scatter artifacts liberally throughout your enemies' possessions? Disjunction can only be properly dealt with by threatening to permanently eliminate the player's only class feature?

I'm not saying that it was well designed. But the nerf is there :smallsmile:

You don't have to scatter artifacts liberally throughout your enemies' possessions - just the fact that casting Disjunction on someone could potentially lead to your irrevocable doom should give your character pause to throwing it around willy-nilly. Otherwise you are metagaming or playing a character with a deathwish and/or serious risk issues.

Blanks
2007-11-11, 03:25 PM
You don't have to scatter artifacts liberally throughout your enemies' possessions - just the fact that casting Disjunction on someone could potentially lead to your irrevocable doom should give your character pause to throwing it around willy-nilly. Otherwise you are metagaming or playing a character with a deathwish and/or serious risk issues.

So 1/16516549849156 chance of some noname npc running around with an artifact without anybody knowing about it

OR

1/x chance that i will be killed if i don't cast disjunction

Actually im not a fan of disjunction or a frequent user, im just saying that if there was some guy in the vicinity wielding a "friggin creation of the friggin gods!!!111!!!" I would assume i heard rumors about it.

As a player i would cry "cheap shot" if my DM planted an artifact just to punish the players... :smallsmile:

JaxGaret
2007-11-11, 03:30 PM
A Deck of Many Things (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/artifacts.htm#deckofManyThings) is an artifact - would you cry foul if an enemy happened to have one of those?

Artifacts don't have to be super powerful OMGWTFBBQ items. They can be fairly ordinary. There are artifacts in many splatbooks that are completely non-combat related.

You usually don't Disjunct noname NPCs running around - they're no threat to you, and you want their stuff. It's the tough nuts to crack that you may use a 9th level spell slot to Disjunct, and they're the ones who may have an artifact or two stored on their person.

Temp
2007-11-11, 03:36 PM
So 1/16516549849156 chance of some noname npc running around with an artifact without anybody knowing about itDue to the existance of DMs, I think it's a bit higher than that.

Disjunction seems appropriate for its level, it's nowhere near epic-power.
Keen Edge always strikes me as a bit weak for a 3rd level spell.
Instant Summons and Mage's (Mordekain's?) Sword strike me as a bit higher-leveled than they ought to be.
Contingency needs clarification; if it can be triggered by things the Wizard can't perceive, it may be Epic. If it's limited to the Wizard's awareness, it should still be a couple levels higher.

Reinboom
2007-11-11, 03:50 PM
I think the case for many of these isn't what level they should be for... it's that they are just bad design. (Disjunction). Personally, I think a better working for disjunction would be to kill you - with only true resurrection being able to bring you back. 25,000 GP down the drain and out of that combat - that's a decent enough punishment.
Out of every combat from that point on and more or less have to make a new character? Not fun.

Not necessarily needing to be epic, but spells that need a level or two increase, or shouldn't exist (striked through), or changed, imo:
Nerveskitter (lvl 2 or 3)
Glitterdust (lvl 3)
Fly (lvl 4) (+ Mass, Fly to level 6)
Shivering Touch (or increased to level 4 or 5, and damage decreased)
Alter Self (lvl 4)
Polymorph, PaO
Celerity (Level 7+ and simply -no action- + does not stack with other temporal effects such as time stop - probably shouldn't exist)
Greater Celerity
Forcecage (Level 8, duration decreased. It's not that bad, just, too early)
Rope Trick, Tiny Hut, MMM (IMO)
Divine Power
Righteous Might
Time Stop
Shapechange (or modified for epic)
Disjunction (or modified heavily)
Programmed Amnesia (Epic)
Gate (Epic)

hmm
note: just my opinion.

oh, and I don't think wish needs to be epic. Wish just needs to be changed. It's rather bad due to the XP cost.

Spiryt
2007-11-11, 03:59 PM
SweetRein's suggestions are good, although I think that fly really should use duration reduction. To 2rounds/level or even round/level.

It would be also nice if some spells (like fly or walls) would require more than standard action to cast.

Temp
2007-11-11, 04:05 PM
I don't know if the Duration of Fly is such a big deal. The mere fact that it introduces a third dimension to D&D is.

I would like it to work like Haste, though: If one member of the party gets to fly, all of them do.

I'd agree that Windwall is a bit low. If it required a check when it was cast (Caster level+Casting stat+d20) to dermine its power [and any Attack rolls that beat the result pass through], I'd be happier with it.

JaxGaret
2007-11-11, 04:19 PM
Oh, yes, Mage's Sword (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magesSword.htm) is too high level. Now Incendiary Cloud (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/incendiaryCloud.htm), that's way too high level.

I wasn't even thinking of spells that were too high of level.

Kaelik
2007-11-11, 06:17 PM
I don't understand what everyones big deal with Fly is, especially since no one has even mentioned Overland Flight.

However, I really don't think that the height or duration is the issue. If you reduce the duration to rounds per level then you just turned a combat/utility spell into just combat. Maybe that's what you want, but that's not something I'm big on.

And height? Really? That's your problem with it? How is 60ft any different from 120ft? Do you really treat cliffs as challenges? Mages cannot make the climb check to scale cliffs. If you are trying to make cliffs challenging you aren't. You are just making them barriers or nothing, depending on height. And if you are upset because they are bypassing your barriers, make better ones. I can think of no situation in which the PCs being able to get over a cliff/wall is in any way a problem for my campaign.

Reinboom
2007-11-11, 06:27 PM
I don't understand what everyones big deal with Fly is, especially since no one has even mentioned Overland Flight.

The addition of a sudden 3rd dimension.
It's not a ridiculously powerful spell, I just feel it's a bit too early, personally. Though, I wouldn't increase the level in my games since the wizard "doesn't exist", and 6th levels + spell known used? Sure, the sorcerer can have it if it wants. It'd be punishing to increase its level there.

Y'know... I think that there's a lot of spells that should be earlier to get for the sorcerer now that I think about it...

The duration of fly definitely isn't an issue for me. Overland flight is a spell I tend to forget about though... hmm... not much opinion on it at this point in time.

Crow
2007-11-11, 06:47 PM
Disjunction is no worse than any of the other 9th level spells...but I'm biased as I use it all the time.

Overland Flight isn't bad at all. Remember you only get a speed of 40ft. and on top of that your maneuverability is only average, which screws you in cavern combats. If you're out in the plains, it can still be quite useful though.

Arakune
2007-11-11, 07:10 PM
I don't understand what everyones big deal with Fly is, especially since no one has even mentioned Overland Flight.

However, I really don't think that the height or duration is the issue. If you reduce the duration to rounds per level then you just turned a combat/utility spell into just combat. Maybe that's what you want, but that's not something I'm big on.

And height? Really? That's your problem with it? How is 60ft any different from 120ft? Do you really treat cliffs as challenges? Mages cannot make the climb check to scale cliffs. If you are trying to make cliffs challenging you aren't. You are just making them barriers or nothing, depending on height. And if you are upset because they are bypassing your barriers, make better ones. I can think of no situation in which the PCs being able to get over a cliff/wall is in any way a problem for my campaign.

Try to shoot something at 60ft. Now try something at 120ft. And at 1000ft.
Better, try to spot something at 60ft, then at 120ft. Now try at 1000ft. "But what if they don't have bows"? Well, that's not MY problem.

Kaelik
2007-11-11, 07:26 PM
Try to shoot something at 60ft. Now try something at 120ft. And at 1000ft.
Better, try to spot something at 60ft, then at 120ft. Now try at 1000ft. "But what if they don't have bows"? Well, that's not MY problem.

Fine, so they can avoid combat. Yay for them. At 120ft, they lose the ability to do anything with the vast majority of their spells. At 1000ft they can't do anything at all, and have the same problems spotting. What about not being in combat is so game breaking. If they want to, I don't know, help anyone else/accomplish any kind of goal, then 60ft is usually a better choice then 120ft, and a hell of a lot better then 1000ft.

Arakune
2007-11-11, 07:31 PM
Fine, so they can avoid combat. Yay for them. At 120ft, they lose the ability to do anything with the vast majority of their spells. At 1000ft they can't do anything at all, and have the same problems spotting. What about not being in combat is so game breaking. If they want to, I don't know, help anyone else/accomplish any kind of goal, then 60ft is usually a better choice then 120ft, and a hell of a lot better then 1000ft.

If you read my post, it's about the instant-run button that is fly at early levels. 3rd level spell and you can run away from almost anything (at that relatively low level, anyway)?

Temp
2007-11-11, 07:35 PM
If you read my post, it's about the instant-run button that is fly at early levels. 3rd level spell and you can run away from almost anything (at that relatively low level, anyway)?No matter the level the spell comes into play, it's going to do this. Knock out Wind-Wall and you remove half the problem with low-level Fly.

The_Blue_Sorceress
2007-11-11, 07:43 PM
If you read my post, it's about the instant-run button that is fly at early levels. 3rd level spell and you can run away from almost anything (at that relatively low level, anyway)?

Running away is only a problem if your plot depends on the characters fighting it out. When the battle is going bad it's not sensible for a character not to want to beat feet. If fly can get the wizard out of harm's way, then so much the better. It's not game breaking by any means, at least not in my experience.

Anyway, in most games I've played, the wizard won't run for it unless the rest of his party can come too. So the players move across the world more quickly, speed up timelines in your game to suit if time is important to your plot.

-Blue

Arakune
2007-11-11, 07:43 PM
No matter the level the spell comes into play, it's going to do this. Knock out Wind-Wall and you remove half the problem with low-level Fly.

Yes, it matter the level. No problem a 10th~14th level wizard casting a spell and run. But at 5th level? There IS something wrong there.

deadseashoals
2007-11-11, 07:53 PM
Yes, it matter the level. No problem a 10th~14th level wizard casting a spell and run. But at 5th level? There IS something wrong there.

Instant run buttons (SRD only):

2nd: invisibility
3rd: fly, invisibility sphere
4th: dimension door
5th: teleport

All accessible before 10th level. Fly is probably the weakest of these for running away, unless you're outdoors. Realize that to even get to 120 feet high, which isn't really that high, it takes a standard action plus two full-round actions (moving up costs double at good maneuverability).

Kurald Galain
2007-11-11, 08:02 PM
Maybe because it would look something like this:


You win this thread! :smallbiggrin: :smallsmile: :smallbiggrin:


Anyway. There are two ways of figuring out a spell's "power level" (over 9000?) - by effect and by source. The first is by giving an estimate of game balance at a certain character level, and figuring out how the spell would affect that. The second is by giving an idea of how the magic works, and figuring out how hard it would be for a character to do this. Note that WOTC tends to do the former (White Wolf tends to do the latter), and note that neither method is a priori better than the other.

If we go by the former method, we should find out at which level it would not significantly unbalance the game for a wizard to fly for the entire battle, and put the Fly spell at that level, regardless of what other spells exist. By this logic, a spell that teleports two friendly people can be of lower level than a spell that teleports one hostile person, because the latter has more game use.

If we go by the latter method, if we assume that telekinesis is a basic magical ability (e.g. Mage Hand cantrip), it follows that once a magician has sufficient power to lift his own weight, he can then fly (e.g. Feather Fall at level 1, Levitate at level 2, Fly at level 3). By this logic, a spell that teleports two people should be higher level than Dimension Door, which only teleports one.

The fun thing of "ruling by source" is that it easily disallows such things as Rope Trick, if we posit that dimension shifting is high magic and certainly not possible with second-level effects. This can quickly fix several of the balance problems.

All philosophy aside, I don't really think Fly is unbalancing. But than, I used to DM second edition, where it lasted for hours, and the Invisibility spell lasted for a full day! You can easily make challenges for a flying character, e.g. by playing in caves, or against ranged combatants.

The one thing I don't like about 3E fly is that rule that, if the spell ends, you float down. I think that, if a spell ends, it ends. If a wizard is foolish enough to be 100 feet in the air when struck by a Dispel Magic, well, he had better have some contingency plan ready. Come on, you have 18 int for a reason...

Arakune
2007-11-11, 08:03 PM
Instant run buttons (SRD only):

2nd: invisibility
3rd: fly, invisibility sphere
4th: dimension door
5th: teleport

All accessible before 10th level. Fly is probably the weakest of these for running away, unless you're outdoors. Realize that to even get to 120 feet high, which isn't really that high, it takes a standard action plus two full-round actions (moving up costs double at good maneuverability).

And yet I stand for my position :smallcool:
There is something wrong about it.

deadseashoals
2007-11-11, 08:07 PM
As for the actual topic...

ray of enfeeblement should be a level or two higher (compare it with ray of exhaustion)
web and glitterdust should be a level higher
alter self should be at least two levels higher, though maybe it shouldn't exist
polymorph should be a 9th level spell, or not exist at all
gate (the summoning option) and shapechange should be epic
genesis should be epic
mass invisibility should be two levels lower
the mass bull's strength, etc line of spells should all be one level lower
meteor swarm should be a level lower
polar ray should be two levels lower
mordenkainen's sword should be a level lower

IMO disjunction is fine. Why would you want to cast it, most of the time? You're blowing up loot, it's the same reason that sunder sucks. It's pretty situational, and when it works, great, it dispels a bunch of crap. Buff spells are too powerful anyway.

Arakune
2007-11-11, 08:09 PM
The one thing I don't like about 3E fly is that rule that, if the spell ends, you float down. I think that, if a spell ends, it ends. If a wizard is foolish enough to be 100 feet in the air when struck by a Dispel Magic, well, he had better have some contingency plan ready. Come on, you have 18 int for a reason...

It works like that? It's even worse!!! :smalleek:

AstralFire
2007-11-11, 08:25 PM
...I'm really missing what's so terrible about the PCs being able to run. At low levels, the wiz is screwed by anything with a ranged attack anyway, since Fly and Fly+Wind Wall take a moderate amount of set-up time. And that's not mentioning the possibility of enemies also having flight ability...

Roderick_BR
2007-11-11, 09:01 PM
I'm not saying that it was well designed. But the nerf is there :smallsmile:

You don't have to scatter artifacts liberally throughout your enemies' possessions - just the fact that casting Disjunction on someone could potentially lead to your irrevocable doom should give your character pause to throwing it around willy-nilly. Otherwise you are metagaming or playing a character with a deathwish and/or serious risk issues.
The problem is that you have only 1% chance for caster level to succeed. A 20th level wizard have 20% chance of doing it. So, the self-nerf have a built-in security valve, to keep you from killing yourself with it.

I agree, some spells are too powerful for non-epic. That's what I keep saying about wizards getting too many powerful abilities for their character level.

Anything that completely block an ability should either be pushed some levels above, or be re-written as allowing some way of avoiding it, even if it's a minimal chance.
I mean, imagine that Kord, the deity of strength, sends an avatar to the material plane. The avatar is barbarian 20/cleric 10. An average level wizard can destroy him easily, by using some effects that'll render the avatar useless, even with some cleric levels, and powerful artifacts.

Tor the Fallen
2007-11-12, 01:41 AM
Putting an invisible ceiling at 60 feet certainly fails my realism check.

Flying people certainly fails my realism check.

MrNexx
2007-11-12, 03:01 AM
Flying people certainly fails my realism check.

As I say with every post... it's not realism, it's verisimilitude... seeming to be real within the framework of the game world. Magic allowing you to fly is verisimilitudinous in a fantasy world. Apparently, for some people, that it would have a ceiling of 60' is pushing it.

My nomination is Rope Trick. With a 1 hour/level duration, invisible, unassailable accommodations nearly anywhere you might be for the length of a rest break starting at level 8 (when duration = minimum rest time for spell retrieval), and vague consequences for bringing in extra-dimensional spaces (which are usually handwaved to vague = none, according to the attitudes of many on this board), it's way over powered at its current level. I'd say at least 4th level, at its current duration.

turkishproverb
2007-11-12, 04:06 AM
Disjuncting. Ah, I love that one. Despite the flashbacks


Using miss tables on to hit rolls. Bad guy's survant (Lich Assasin) is about to grab artifact that can save the world. Player tries to Disjunct his Pythcary. Rolls cricical miss. Rolls to see if it hits anything in the room. Artifact that means saving the universe hit. Player rolls critical. Artifact Disjoins. Bad guys win.

Then I get strung up by players.

Kizara
2007-11-12, 05:09 AM
Maybe because it would look something like this:

(Big Pic, rated PG for minor doodled gore.)

http://i183.photobucket.com/albums/x38/MightyDraco/wtf.png


I'm sorry, but that's not only so unspeakably great as a picture, but your comedic timing in presenting it was priceless.

You win at threads.

Dode
2007-11-12, 05:20 AM
Anyone who can't think a counter to flying in a game called fracking Dungeons and Dragons... yeesh.

Tor the Fallen
2007-11-12, 05:23 AM
Disjuncting. Ah, I love that one. Despite the flashbacks


Using miss tables on to hit rolls. Bad guy's survant (Lich Assasin) is about to grab artifact that can save the world. Player tries to Disjunct his Pythcary. Rolls cricical miss. Rolls to see if it hits anything in the room. Artifact that means saving the universe hit. Player rolls critical. Artifact Disjoins. Bad guys win.

Then I get strung up by players.

3e Disjunction doesn't require an attack roll. It's just a 40ft radius burst within close range.

AKA_Bait
2007-11-12, 10:06 AM
Realism doesn't have to mean that things work exactly the same as it does on our own world, it can also mean that a world or system it is logical and internally consistent. It's called suspension of disbelief.



Realism (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/realism)

verisimilitude (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/verisimilitude)

/picky

Oh, and I see it's been mentioned, but Shapechange and Rope Trick.

Morty
2007-11-12, 10:26 AM
Rope Trick shouldn't be higher level, it shouldn't exist at all.

Draz74
2007-11-12, 12:51 PM
My argument why Fly is overpowered:

If it were a 5th-level spell, it would still get used by Wizards who got to Level 9. (If, of course, Overland Flight were also increased to 7th level or something.) It would still be considered a decent 6th level spell, because it is just so darned useful.

That's a red flag for me.

Arakune
2007-11-12, 01:01 PM
My arguments for this 'ceiling' is that I think (like :vaarsuvius: or :xykon:) that magic is supposed to be using raw magic energy to bash things into submission, and analogue to more 'subtle' spells. You cast fly? If you have more magic power, you can fly higher and faster. You cast invisibility? If you have power, you can make something up to medium size (you or your friend) while still moving (no problem about attacking, attacking someone don't make you less invisible in my book, at least if you have enough power) or, if you lack power, only something diminutive and immobile (moving the object will dispell the spell).

Assume everything I say will be at that perspective. :smallwink:

Kaelik
2007-11-12, 01:04 PM
My arguments for this 'ceiling' is that I think (like :vaarsuvius: or :xykon:) that magic is supposed to be using raw magic energy to bash things into submission, and analogue to more 'subtle' spells. You cast fly? If you have more magic power, you can fly higher and faster. You cast invisibility? If you have power, you can make something up to medium size (you or your friend) while still moving (no problem about attacking, attacking someone don't make you less invisible in my book, at least if you have enough power) or, if you lack power, only something diminutive and immobile (moving the object will dispell the spell).

Assume everything I say will be at that perspective. :smallwink:

Well then you aren't playing D&D. And you need to revamp the entire magic system, not just a few spells.

MrNexx
2007-11-12, 02:03 PM
My argument why Fly is overpowered:

If it were a 5th-level spell, it would still get used by Wizards who got to Level 9. (If, of course, Overland Flight were also increased to 7th level or something.) It would still be considered a decent 6th level spell, because it is just so darned useful.

That's a red flag for me.

And that's pretty much the definition of an overpowered spell... "If this were a level higher, would I still take it?"

And I have to disagree that Rope Trick should not exist. It should be better defined and either more vulnerable or shorter duration.

JaxGaret
2007-11-12, 02:15 PM
And that's pretty much the definition of an overpowered spell... "If this were a level higher, would I still take it?"

The only problem with this view is that then pretty much every spell in the PHB is overpowered, simply because full casters are not balanced to non-casters.

If you took every spell in the game and made it a level higher, casters would still be viable.

I'm not claiming that what you say is wrong, MrNexx, I'm just bringing up the point that the power level of spells themselves and the power level of classes that cast spells are two separate issues.

AKA_Bait
2007-11-12, 02:16 PM
And that's pretty much the definition of an overpowered spell... "If this were a level higher, would I still take it?"

Well, in that case, let me add Prestdigitation, read magic, dispell magic, command, dominate person, tongues, enervation, M's Private Sanctum, Magic Jar, Telekenisis, Permenancy....

I don't think all, or most, of those are overpowered for their level. However, they are so useful, or needed in the case of dispel magic, that I would take them at a level or two higher just because I needed/really wanted something that did what those spells do. The test of if a spell is overpowered or underpowered for it's level is 'how much practical game impact' does this spell have in realtion to the other spells of this level.


And I have to disagree that Rope Trick should not exist. It should be better defined and either more vulnerable or shorter duration.

One of the first two I think.

Edit: Well said Jaxgaret

JaxGaret
2007-11-12, 02:23 PM
Well, in that case, let me add Prestdigitation, read magic, dispell magic, command, dominate person, tongues, enervation, M's Private Sanctum, Magic Jar, Telekenisis, Permenancy....

I don't think all, or most, of those are overpowered for their level. However, they are so useful, or needed in the case of dispel magic, that I would take them at a level or two higher just because I needed/really wanted something that did what those spells do. The test of if a spell is overpowered or underpowered for it's level is 'how much practical game impact' does this spell have in realtion to the other spells of this level.

QFT, and something I would have addended to my post.


Edit: Well said Jaxgaret

Right back atcha Bait.

MrNexx
2007-11-12, 02:27 PM
The only problem with this view is that then pretty much every spell in the PHB is overpowered, simply because full casters are not balanced to non-casters.

If you took every spell in the game and made it a level higher, casters would still be viable.

You have to consider them in comparison to each other, not in comparison to non-spellcasting classes. The problems that 3.x has with non-spellcasters is a separate issue.

Let's look at Bait's example of Prestidigitation. It is a very versatile spell, with a duration that is quite long. Would it be better as a 1st level spell? It would still be useful, but it wouldn't compare to things like Color Spray, Disguise Self (which I still call Change Self), or Grease. It would still have its uses, mostly in versatility, but not nearly what you need. Now, if it were a 1st level spell which, when prepared, allowed you to cast any Cantrip you could think of, that would be worthwhile... but it's not.

That's what you have to do when considering spells. Is this going to be a powerful 3rd level spell, or a weak 4th level spell?

JaxGaret
2007-11-12, 02:46 PM
You have to consider them in comparison to each other, not in comparison to non-spellcasting classes. The problems that 3.x has with non-spellcasters is a separate issue.

Right, which is why there was a second part to my post, which you left out:


I'm not claiming that what you say is wrong, MrNexx, I'm just bringing up the point that the power level of spells themselves and the power level of classes that cast spells are two separate issues.

AKA_Bait
2007-11-12, 02:46 PM
Let's look at Bait's example of Prestidigitation. It is a very versatile spell, with a duration that is quite long. Would it be better as a 1st level spell? It would still be useful, but it wouldn't compare to things like Color Spray, Disguise Self (which I still call Change Self), or Grease. It would still have its uses, mostly in versatility, but not nearly what you need. Now, if it were a 1st level spell which, when prepared, allowed you to cast any Cantrip you could think of, that would be worthwhile... but it's not.

That's what you have to do when considering spells. Is this going to be a powerful 3rd level spell, or a weak 4th level spell?

But take my example of Dispel Magic. Would that still be what you need as a 4th level spell if you must get rid of an active spell? Sure it would. 5th level too. Right up until you get Greater Dispel. It's a spell that at a particular stage of the game you just need to have access to.

Fly is like that. By the time you can cast third level spells there are a good number of monsters that can fly naturally. Does it give you what you need at 4th? Sure. 5th? Sure? Does that mean there is some problem with having it be accessable (at a shorter duration) at lower levels? Is it as good as Enervation or have as much effect as Hallicunatory Terrain at 4th? Scrying? I don't really think so. 5th level? Feeblemind? Cloudkill? Teleport? It might be a strong 3rd level spell that remains useful over time, like dispel magic, but if it's overpowered for it's level it's not by much.

MrNexx
2007-11-12, 03:18 PM
But take my example of Dispel Magic. Would that still be what you need as a 4th level spell if you must get rid of an active spell? Sure it would. 5th level too. Right up until you get Greater Dispel. It's a spell that at a particular stage of the game you just need to have access to.

Dispel Magic is a tricky case, I'll grant you that; it's such an essential process to the game that it has to be present at some level. NWN introduced a "Lesser Dispel" as a 2nd level spell which capped its level bonus at +5 that I didn't think was overpowered.


Fly is like that. By the time you can cast third level spells there are a good number of monsters that can fly naturally. Does it give you what you need at 4th? Sure. 5th? Sure? Does that mean there is some problem with having it be accessable (at a shorter duration) at lower levels? Is it as good as Enervation or have as much effect as Hallicunatory Terrain at 4th? Scrying? I don't really think so. 5th level? Feeblemind? Cloudkill? Teleport? It might be a strong 3rd level spell that remains useful over time, like dispel magic, but if it's overpowered for it's level it's not by much.

Comparing the need to fly to the monsters you start facing around 5th level is a good example. Fly is useful at 3rd level; you can get a couple lesser versions at 2nd level (levitate and alter self... alter self has more utility, and is probably overpowered for its level, but that's another story), and if you look at 4th level spells, movement starts becoming controllably instantaneous (Dimension Door) or based on powerful transformation (Polymorph). IMO, Fly fits in pretty well where it is; it's a logical progression from Levitate, which is a logical progression from Feather Fall.

AKA_Bait
2007-11-12, 03:41 PM
Comparing the need to fly to the monsters you start facing around 5th level is a good example. Fly is useful at 3rd level; you can get a couple lesser versions at 2nd level (levitate and alter self... alter self has more utility, and is probably overpowered for its level, but that's another story), and if you look at 4th level spells, movement starts becoming controllably instantaneous (Dimension Door) or based on powerful transformation (Polymorph). IMO, Fly fits in pretty well where it is; it's a logical progression from Levitate, which is a logical progression from Feather Fall.

I'm trying to figure out if we are agreeing about fly or not. I think we are. 5th level there meant 5th character level (when a Wizard gets 3rd level spells). Hence, considering the other spells and monsters CR appropriate, I don't think fly is overpowered as a 3rd level spell.

MrNexx
2007-11-12, 04:53 PM
I'm trying to figure out if we are agreeing about fly or not. I think we are. 5th level there meant 5th character level (when a Wizard gets 3rd level spells). Hence, considering the other spells and monsters CR appropriate, I don't think fly is overpowered as a 3rd level spell.

We are agreeing. I think the spell makes a fair amount of sense where it is... right on the edge of what I start to consider "epic".

Arakune
2007-11-12, 05:17 PM
Well then you aren't playing D&D. And you need to revamp the entire magic system, not just a few spells.

That's the point of the topic actually, but I don't have enough experience with all the spells in the game, that's why I started this thread.

Kaelik
2007-11-12, 07:40 PM
That's the point of the topic actually, but I don't have enough experience with all the spells in the game, that's why I started this thread.

No, that's my point. The point of the topic it to identify (and maybe correct) the few spells that are too good for their level.

The point of the thread is not to change the entire magic system by developing a whole new system of evaluating effects, and judging the spells based on this new system.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-12, 07:45 PM
And that's pretty much the definition of an overpowered spell... "If this were a level higher, would I still take it?"

No, I think the definition might be more like "would most wizards always, or nearly always, choose to memorize this spell rather than another spell of the same level?"

Keyword is "most" wizards, because there's always going to be "some" wizards that memorize spell X because they think it's cool. That is not relevant.

However, based on this definition, Dispel Magic may be considered overpowered, because people refuse to drop the Abjuration school mainly because of this spell...

Reinboom
2007-11-12, 07:51 PM
No, I think the definition might be more like "would most wizards always, or nearly always, choose to memorize this spell rather than another spell of the same level?"

Keyword is "most" wizards, because there's always going to be "some" wizards that memorize spell X because they think it's cool. That is not relevant.

However, based on this definition, Dispel Magic may be considered overpowered, because people refuse to drop the Abjuration school mainly because of this spell...

Or Dispel magic might be a backwards example...
Magic is so powerful that casters -need- dispel magic in order to get rid of it. Dispel magic increases in power as what it gets rid of increases in power.
What's more powerful as a long range spell? : Kill target fighter, no save. OR Kill target wizard, no save.

=That's to say, it doesn't help changing dispel magic in this case. As the issue will still be there.

Dode
2007-11-12, 08:27 PM
Well then you aren't playing D&D. And you need to revamp the entire magic system, not just a few spells. Maybe they could play a game of Dungeons & Dragons in a, y'know, dungeon and instead of rewriting the game for a magical ceiling, just put in a actual ceiling. Or fight some enemies that can also fly. Like dragons. Sometimes I wonder what sort of game these people are actually playing.

Hawriel
2007-11-12, 08:28 PM
Well, frankly, there are a lot of spells that (on a failed save) make a 20th-level whatever suck compared to 17-20th level encounters. Any death spell, for starters.


Putting an invisible ceiling at 60 feet certainly fails my realism check.

I don't think the height is the problem with fly. Rather, the problems are (1) it obviates climbing, (2) it effectively obviates stealth, and (3) people can't reach you if you're more than a few meters off the floor.

1) so does levitate, rope of climing, flying mounts, demention door, any teleport spells and items.

2) Is it day or night? flying does not make you silent. orcs can look up. NPCs in second or highter stories can look out the window. NPCs posted on walls and towers. Bad guys have magic to, and know there is such a thing as a fly spell.

3) Archers, magic missile, lightning bolt, dispel magic, rope with laso, Giants throw rocks, Giants are tall, Dragons are very tall and fly. Bad guy wizards can have fly. I can do this all day. OH one more, your flight was canceled do to weather

Miracle is not overpowered as written in the spell discription. You can cast any other spell, by waisting a 9th level spell. I use miracle as a plot devise. If Miracle is over powered or game braking so is resurection at any level other than epic. Atonment should not be a spell at all.

Cakedeath
2007-11-12, 11:10 PM
Sorry if anyone has said this, but scorching ray does way too much damage for level 2.

turkishproverb
2007-11-12, 11:24 PM
3e Disjunction doesn't require an attack roll. It's just a 40ft radius burst within close range.

I know. I ruled (to be nice, and try to save the campain) that he could try to direct it to keep the Lich from getting the item. He failed.

TheOOB
2007-11-13, 12:13 AM
The trouble with spells like, fly, dimension door, and teleport is that are too good at ruining a DM's plans for what level you get them at. Fly can be gotten as early as 5th level in most cases, which means a DM has all of 4 levels (assuming you are starting at level 1), to use all the large pits, giant chasems, high walls, and difficult air vs. ground encounters they are going to use, because starting at level 5 the party wizard can just circumvent most these problems. Lets not mention the fact that many new players won't be ready for three dimensional encounters by 5th level. Every try explaining Attacks of Opportunity to a new player? It's hard enough when you threaten 8 squares around you, but when you all of a sudden threaten three times the area, most of which is on a different horizontal plane then you? That's really tough.

Dimension Door does a similar thing for barriers, as long as you know a direction and distance, you can teleport there, unless you dimension lock everything, but thats an 8th level spell!(yes, the spell specifically made to foil another spell is twice the level, figure that one out). Teleport removes most all travel time to the game as well. So by 9th level, most tricks a DM can use a slow, bar, or direct a players progress has been removed.

Idea Man
2007-11-13, 01:03 AM
The orb spells are entirely too effective. A high-damage, no spell-resistance touch attack is just wrong. If my one player wasn't an archmage with spell-shaping, he'd cast nothing but energy-substituted orbs.

I agree that wind wall is too effective, but you could change it from "arrows and bolts are deflected upward and miss" to "arrows and bolts get a -2 to hit per three levels, max -10". Useful at all levels. :smallbiggrin:

True seeing. Illusions are pointless from now on. Oh, it has a cost, but if you even have a hint of facing an illusionist at that level, who would hesitate to cast it? Any encounter at that level has the prospect of generating 250 gp in rewards, even after a fair split.

How about Harm? Minimum 110 points of damage, no variable. Even if you save, you have to make an additional save due to massive damage or die. Really, I don't think it's that bad, but I don't think I saw any cleric spells on the list yet. :smallwink:

shadowdemon_lord
2007-11-13, 01:16 AM
To teleport somewhere, you gotta know where your going. Scrying magic can obviate this nessesity, but their are ways around it. You can give your PC's things to do at unstated intervals along the way as well. You could make the area dangerous to teleport into. Fly is a touch spell, that range doesn't do the rest of the party any good if you happen to drop them in the pit. Low level wizards aren't going to be able to cast fly lots of times a day. You could make it so that flying over that wall with only half the party seems like a really bad idea. Most mid level spells can be made to not break the game if the DM thinks outside the box. That is one of the reasons that mid level is considered the sweet spot for D&D.

Back to the topic at hand. I think Fly is a good third level spell, but that mass fly should be fifth or sixth. Having one person fly is a whole different ball game then having the entire party fly. I think Disjuction should be replaced with a greatest version of dispell magic. Maybe give it a check that's higher then your caster level, and that has no cap (so it scales into epic). I think Miracle, Reality Revision, and Wish should all be brought into line with each other in terms of what spells/powers can be duplicated. The special "more powerful" options of each should stay to differenciate them from each other. The option to ask for whatever you want should be taken away. Various outsiders that can cast wish should be given this aspect of the spell, and not the other aspects.

JaxGaret
2007-11-13, 01:54 AM
Sorry if anyone has said this, but scorching ray does way too much damage for level 2.

Because it's single target, close range, and the target gets multiple applications of Energy Resistance against it if you're shooting more than one ray, it would be underpowered as a 3rd level spell. It's one of those nebulous spells where it's nice for its level spell but not good enough to be a higher level spell.

Plus, it's direct damage anyway. Overpowered DD spells are pretty much an oxymoron.

:smallsmile:

deadseashoals
2007-11-13, 02:11 AM
The trouble with spells like, fly, dimension door, and teleport is that are too good at ruining a DM's plans for what level you get them at. Fly can be gotten as early as 5th level in most cases, which means a DM has all of 4 levels (assuming you are starting at level 1), to use all the large pits, giant chasems, high walls, and difficult air vs. ground encounters they are going to use, because starting at level 5 the party wizard can just circumvent most these problems. Lets not mention the fact that many new players won't be ready for three dimensional encounters by 5th level. Every try explaining Attacks of Opportunity to a new player? It's hard enough when you threaten 8 squares around you, but when you all of a sudden threaten three times the area, most of which is on a different horizontal plane then you? That's really tough.

Dimension Door does a similar thing for barriers, as long as you know a direction and distance, you can teleport there, unless you dimension lock everything, but thats an 8th level spell!(yes, the spell specifically made to foil another spell is twice the level, figure that one out). Teleport removes most all travel time to the game as well. So by 9th level, most tricks a DM can use a slow, bar, or direct a players progress has been removed.

If you want environmental challenges, you have to remove some things from the game, or just accept that the nature of your environmental challenges is going to have to change at least to some extend beyond certain key levels. Navigating a chasm fails to be a puzzle, and instead is a mandatory resource consumption point.

Realistically, if your party arcanist is a wizard, your party isn't going to be flying across a chasm at level 5 anyway, so you've got some extra time. The wizard can cast fly on two people at that level, or three if he's a transmuter. At the cost of all of his highest level spell slots, and it won't even get the whole party.

Forbiddancce can be used more effectively than dimension lock to ward dimensional travel, and it's a 6th level spell. Hallow/unhallow with a dimensional anchor tied to it can arguably be used the same way as well.

Kaelik
2007-11-13, 02:15 AM
Plus, it's direct damage anyway. Overpowered DD spells are pretty much an oxymoron.

Scorching Ray? Or Glitterdust? Oh, yeah, suddenly Scorching Ray isn't such a big deal.

Arakune
2007-11-13, 10:06 AM
No, that's my point. The point of the topic it to identify (and maybe correct) the few spells that are too good for their level.

The point of the thread is not to change the entire magic system by developing a whole new system of evaluating effects, and judging the spells based on this new system.

No, that's MY point. By putting some spells to epic level or upgrading or downgrading the spell level it become more easy to make the new system.

Remember that I made the topic, so who better to know why I stated this :smallcool:

JaxGaret
2007-11-13, 10:19 AM
Scorching Ray? Or Glitterdust? Oh, yeah, suddenly Scorching Ray isn't such a big deal.

Scorching Ray is Direct Damage. Glitterdust is a Save or Suck.

Mr. Moogle
2007-11-13, 10:27 AM
Ray of Clumsieness my DM showed me a build that was level 7 and could 1 shot Great Wyrmm dragons :smalltongue:

Kaelik
2007-11-13, 11:02 AM
Ray of Clumsieness my DM showed me a build that was level 7 and could 1 shot Great Wyrmm dragons :smalltongue:

If you are level 7, well then you have access to Shivering Touch, so of course you can one shot Dragons.


Scorching Ray is Direct Damage. Glitterdust is a Save or Suck.

That is correct? I don't see the point. I am well aware of that. Is there a particular direction you were going with that?

Kaelik
2007-11-13, 11:08 AM
No, that's MY point. By putting some spells to epic level or upgrading or downgrading the spell level it become more easy to make the new system.

Remember that I made the topic, so who better to know why I stated this :smallcool:

Well then you really need to work on your communication skills, and probably logic too. You asked what spells where too low a level. You didn't ask what level spells should be if you were using a completely different system of magic in a completely different game that just happened to give similar abilities from spells.

You have a fundamental disconnect from the everyone else here because we are talking about a system of magic in which spells grant abilities that are granted at the level they are comparable to other options/needed. You on the other hand are talking about some system that doesn't exist in which abilities are granted in a progression that starts with the real world and as the amount it defies your expectations increases, it becomes a higher level. D&D is not that system.

Kurald Galain
2007-11-13, 12:31 PM
1) so does levitate, rope of climing, flying mounts, demention door, any teleport spells and items.
Well, yes, if you had read my more recent message you would have seen that I don't really see a problem with fly.

Fly does, however, make stealthing a lot easier, especially indoors (or, say, in a forest) simply because there are plenty more spots for you to hide. It all depends if you're going by the rules-as-written, or by using common sense. The latter indicates that (by psychological fact) people rarely look far up, and that most noise while walking comes from your feet hitting the ground.

Note that most of the measures-to-hit-flyers you mention have a range of 100-200 foot, and fly can easily go much higher than that. Ropes and giants won't reach a flyer any time soon.

Arakune
2007-11-13, 12:58 PM
Well then you really need to work on your communication skills, and probably logic too. You asked what spells where too low a level. You didn't ask what level spells should be if you were using a completely different system of magic in a completely different game that just happened to give similar abilities from spells.

You have a fundamental disconnect from the everyone else here because we are talking about a system of magic in which spells grant abilities that are granted at the level they are comparable to other options/needed. You on the other hand are talking about some system that doesn't exist in which abilities are granted in a progression that starts with the real world and as the amount it defies your expectations increases, it becomes a higher level. D&D is not that system.

And yet I still stand at my point, since I wanted help to know which spells are too high/low level for it's current spell level. What I do with this information is my business :smallsigh:. In order to make this system (that, in fact, I'm not 'making' but adapting from another source) I'm looking for information of spells that are too powerful to it's current level, since spells that fall in the 'OK' range don't need to be modified.
Wait, this thread is about knowing what spells are too much powerful to it's current level. Better yet :smalleek: , I can use this information to adapt the normal D&D spells to this new system!

:smallsigh: I just didn't though that I need to explain every bit of what I want to do with I read in the forum in order to receive some answer about something unrelated to the topic.

And for starters, you was originally complaining about some artificial 'ceiling' in a spell (regardless the fact that a certain Kobold can become the most powerful being in the existence at, if he are unlucky, in the 7th~8th level or to 'heal' 10 x 100E negative HP by drowning and acquire +infinity bonus at all skills, and maybe acquiring briefly Omniscience, by dropping a rock in your feet) that I proposed to make some spell less powerful at relatively low level and I just replied of how that kind of spell can come to existence.:smallbiggrin:

Also, let's cut this. Now. I don't want this thread to be looked anytime soon.

Keld Denar
2007-11-13, 02:02 PM
If you want environmental challenges, you have to remove some things from the game, or just accept that the nature of your environmental challenges is going to have to change at least to some extend beyond certain key levels. Navigating a chasm fails to be a puzzle, and instead is a mandatory resource consumption point.


Its still an "encounter" because it consumes a certain amount of a parties daily resources. It might even consume non-renewable resources if the party is forced to start burning scrolls or other limited use items. A smart DM will acknowledge this, and put it in (or not) based on an asumption that it will deplete a certain amount of resources, which then might not be available at a later time in the day. Because the wizard had to cast fly, thats one less haste, slow, ray of enfeeblement, or other such spell he can cast in a day. If he does it from a scroll, then that is less money that the party has to make other purchases. The "encounter" should also reward experience, though, since it IS overcoming an encounter. The amount awarded depends on the amount of resources required to overcome it.

So, if the party wiz casts fly on the party fighter who carries everyone up the cliff (provided he has the encumberance to do so), they should get xp. If the party fighter climbs the cliff (making checks) and then lowers a knotted rope to allow even the wiz to climb up, then the party should get xp (since they consume time, another resource). The two rewards should be similar, if not the same depending on which resource is more valuable at the time. This rewards players for spending resources (time or spells) to over come obsticles, which is what the game was designed around in the first place.

So no, I don't have a problem with fly. Even at its level. If players fly over my carefully crafted pit trap of DOOM (TM), great. They aren't gonna have that spell when later on, they encounter the flying creature X or even another encounter that might easily be bypassed by flying.

Lance
2007-11-13, 02:39 PM
Overpowered spells that are NOT fly:

Mage Armor + Shield (1st Lvl SRD)

Every monastery should be training their monks to be first level wizards or sorcerers. Dex Bonus + Wis Bonus + 4 Armor Bonus + 4 Shield Bonus to AC!! Also effective against incorporeal touch attacks and and blocks magic missiles.

Deific Vengenance (2nd Lvl Spell Compendium)

Balanced at low caster levels, way overpowered at high caster levels. Does up to 5d6 dmg (106d against undead), so ends up being better than most 3rd level and many 4th level spells.

Conviction (1st Lvl Spell Compendium)

Balanced at low caster levels, overpowered at high caster levels. Gives up to a +5 moral bonus to saving throws for potentially hours. Any high level cleric should just memorize these and cast it on every party member before going into a dangerous situation to make the entire party pass most saving throws.

Kaelik
2007-11-13, 02:48 PM
And yet I still stand at my point, since I wanted help to know which spells are too high/low level for it's current spell level. What I do with this information is my business :smallsigh:. In order to make this system (that, in fact, I'm not 'making' but adapting from another source) I'm looking for information of spells that are too powerful to it's current level, since spells that fall in the 'OK' range don't need to be modified.

The problem is that if you are going to base spell levels and what spells can do off of an different system then D&D:

1) You should say that, so that we could try to use your system to judge your question.
2) You shouldn't just be asking about "what spells are too low a level" because the short answer is everything. Changing only a few spells is not going to give you the system you claim you want. What you actually need to do is look at every single spell in the game, and redesign every single one.

Arbitrarity
2007-11-13, 04:19 PM
And for starters, you was originally complaining about some artificial 'ceiling' in a spell (regardless the fact that a certain Kobold can become the most powerful being in the existence at, if he are unlucky, in the 7th~8th level or to 'heal' 10 x 100E negative HP by drowning and acquire +infinity bonus at all skills, and maybe acquiring briefly Omniscience, by dropping a rock in your feet) that I proposed to make some spell less powerful at relatively low level and I just replied of how that kind of spell can come to existence.:smallbiggrin:

Also, let's cut this. Now. I don't want this thread to be looked anytime soon.

Adapted Godwinned your own thread. Nice.