PDA

View Full Version : Spell idea



Illsbane
2008-01-21, 08:07 AM
So I had another idea for a spell ... Tell me what you think and what should be altered, please?

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

Spell name: Continuous Stream

Evocation [varies]
Level: Sor/Wiz 3
Components: S, M
Casting time: 1 round
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Area: Cone
Duration: Concentration; maximum duration 1 round/level
Saving throw: Reflex negates - special
Spell resistance: Yes

When casting Continuous Stream, a current of energy springs from both your hands to a target you designate. If the target is hit, it - and anyone else unfortunate enough to be in the cone's reach - takes 1d6 damage per 2 caster levels, to a maximum of 10d6. You may choose from two types of energy when casting the spell: electricity or fire. As long as you maintain concentration - provided the spell duration has not expired - and keep your hands free, you may continue to project the energy stream. A target that remains inside the cone continues to take damage unless it succeeds at consecutive Reflex saves. On your turn, you may redirect the energy stream to a new target, but you may not interrupt it while doing so; any interruption causes the spell to end completely. Therefore, Continuous Stream is susceptible to spells like Dispel Magic.
A target hit by the electricity version of this spell must make a Fortitude save, or risks being stunned for one round.
A target hit by the fire version of this spell must make an additional Reflex save, or risks being set on fire, with all the results thereof.

Material component: 10 gp per round that the spell is maintained.

Lady Tialait
2008-01-21, 08:19 AM
The negitive Energy part of this spell is a little overpowered, i wouldn't have done that.

Negitive Energy heals undead, where as Fire and Eleticity do not.

I can see a Necromancer throwing this spell into a bunch of undead, so what if there is some living in there? it's a cone so it can hurt and heal at the same time.

As you can see it's a little...erm..yeah.

Illsbane
2008-01-21, 08:23 AM
Okay, wiping negative energy. What else?

Baron Corm
2008-01-21, 03:49 PM
This is strictly better than fireball or lightning bolt (both 3rd level AoE damage spells). What I would do is restrict the cone to a reasonable length, say 60 feet. I would also change the save (for damage) to Reflex half because it is simply how every single other area of effect spell works.

You will likely have to change the stunning effect from the lightning version. An area of effect save-or-suck is way too good for a third level spell. It's also way better than the fire version. If you decide to keep the stunning you will have to increase the material cost significantly, even with a range reduction. If you get rid of or change the stunning, you can probably drop the material cost.

My final suggestion is to give a flavorful material component if you do decide to keep one. No spell just has gold as a component.

Lady Tialait
2008-01-21, 03:57 PM
My final suggestion is to give a flavorful material component if you do decide to keep one. No spell just has gold as a component.

Gems work tho..

Rubies for Fire

Quarts for Eletric....

Zenos
2008-01-21, 04:15 PM
Gems work tho..

Rubies for Fire

Quarts for Eletric....

Amethyst then. I've always associated amethyst's with Necromancy because of Warhammer Fantasy.

MagFlare
2008-01-22, 06:21 AM
My final suggestion is to give a flavorful material component if you do decide to keep one. No spell just has gold as a component.

Hey, idea:

While the prices are the same, the material component for the fire version is a specially-treated candle wick, an inch of which burns for every round the spell is maintained. The electrical version requires a metal filament that melts by one inch for every round.