Opinions on a Homebrew Spell?

[Chilingsworth]

Hey Playgrounders!

This is the first time I've posted in in the hombrew forum, so just getting my toe wet.

A thread in the 3.5 forum reminded me of this spell I thought up. Sadly, neither of my DM's particularly like the idea of custom spell creation, so I've never gotten to use it. I was wondering if it's an acceptable spell:
(Also, the name is just a place holder.)

Chilingsworth's Armor Up

Conjuration (Creation)
Sor/Wiz 5
Components: S,V,M
Casting Time: 1 Standard Action
Range: Medium (100 ft + 10ft/level)
Target: 1 creature not wearing armor
Effect: one suit of masterwork fullplate
Duration: 10 minutes/level
Save: Reflex Partial (See Text)
Spell Resistance: No

The scrap of steel in your hand is consumed as you cast this spell, as a set of finely crafted fullplate forms around your chosen beneficiary... or victim.

When you cast this spell, you cause a complete set of masterwork fullplate to form around its target. If the target does not wish to recieve the fullplate, he or she may attempt a reflex save. If this save suceeds, the fullplate still forms, but lands on their foot instead, dealing 1d6 damage and causing them to move at half speed until they receive a DC 15 heal check or an amount of magical healing equal to the damage dealt.

This spell is often used to hamper enemy arcane casters, but may be used to aid a warrior ally.

Material Component: A scrap of steel from a sundered set of fullplate.

[toapat]

it probably is severely over leveled, and it becomes extremely powerful when permanence is available.

[TuggyNE]

I'd peg this as a third- or fourth-level spell, personally, or perhaps even lower.

It's not entirely clear, though: does a successful save avoid wearing the armor?

Also, does use of (greater) mage armor or (greater) luminous armor prevent targeting? You should clarify. (They probably shouldn't.)

it probably is severely over leveled, and it becomes extremely powerful when permanence is available.

Since permanency only applies to a specific list (which doesn't contain any splatbook spells, much less homebrew, and has no provision for adding suitable spells) I don't think this is a valid consideration.

[Grod_The_Giant]

toapat is half right. It's extremely overleveled. I'd put it at second, maybe third level.

Oh, and permanency? Congratulations, you spent a decent sum of XP to get a 1600 gold mundane item that can be dispelled. (I see no reason that you can't take the armor off normally)

[toapat]

Since permanency only applies to a specific list (which doesn't contain any splatbook spells, much less homebrew, and has no provision for adding suitable spells) I don't think this is a valid consideration.

while the formula for Permanency is not written out, it is (Spell Level +8)CL, and (500*Spell level)XP, it does note that the DM may determine if the spell can be permanenced

and what i meant was that it was cost wise it was likely very powerful

[Almagesto]

I would also go for lvl 3-4. I guess permanency really won't be a problem.

One thing I'm curious of: say, I have in my hands some mithril. Do I conjure up a mithril fullplate armor?

[Sacrieur]

It's potentially intended use (full armor on an ally) makes it seem like it's a bit overleveled, but it can be used so creatively that it's placed close to where it needs to go. I think it works better as a level 4, though.

What's the explanation about the reflex save bit. Why do they move at half speed?

I could see you casting this on an enemy caster and then follow it up with a healthy shocking grasp. +3 to hit because of the armor and 5d6. Not too bad if you're looking to conserve higher level spells.

Although this may just irritate your big stupid fighter or glass cannon, since you just made that squishy wiggly finger guy into something harder to hit. But I'm betting there's a transmute metal into stone spell out there somewhere. Which means you can essentially petrify someone without a fort save.

[Chilingsworth]

Yes, the save is supposed to prevent it forming on the target.
If the target is wearing armor (meaning a suit of armor, not mage armor or bracers of armor) It would be immune to the spell. Luminious Armor (regular or greater) would grant immunity, though. I just don't know how to describe that better than "one creature not wearing armor."

As for being overleveled, I thought that might be the case. Still, I figured I'd be conservative on the matter.

What about worsening the secondary effect, something like: "If the save succeeds, the armor does not form around the target, instead landing on his/her foot. This deals 1d6 damage and crushes the foot, reducing his/her land speed by half until the victim receives a regenerate spell."

Would that make it more appropriate? Also, if I wanted to offer this spell to bards, what level should they get it at (if at all)?

[Sacrieur]

I would be fairly comfortable with it not requiring any regeneration and just doing like 1d4 points of damage if they make the save and making it a level 3 spell and not slowing them down. As it is now, there are many better spells out there to slow down squishies.

And turning on yourself or an ally is meh. It may come in handy a few times, but I doubt it unless they're lower level.

[Chilingsworth]

It's potentially intended use (full armor on an ally) makes it seem like it's a bit overleveled, but it can be used so creatively that it's placed close to where it needs to go. I think it works better as a level 4, though.

What's the explanation about the reflex save bit. Why do they move at half speed?

I could see you casting this on an enemy caster and then follow it up with a healthy shocking grasp. +3 to hit because of the armor and 5d6. Not too bad if you're looking to conserve higher level spells.

Although this may just irritate your big stupid fighter or glass cannon, since you just made that squishy wiggly finger guy into something harder to hit. But I'm betting there's a transmute metal into stone spell out there somewhere. Which means you can essentially petrify someone without a fort save.

The reflex save is the person moving such that the armor can't form around them properly, and just slips off. The "land on their foot," part is for comedic value as much as anything, but also made alittle sense to me.

[Almagesto]

And what about the metal variants?

[Chilingsworth]

I would be fairly comfortable with it not requiring any regeneration and just doing like 1d4 points of damage if they make the save and making it a level 3 spell and not slowing them down. As it is now, there are many better spells out there to slow down squishies.

And turning on yourself or an ally is meh. It may come in handy a few times, but I doubt it unless they're lower level.

Oh, its fully intended to have (partially) neutering arcanists as its primary function. It wasn't designed to be the "best spell ever!!" at its job, just a creative way to accomplish it. The half movement thing is, as I said partly as a comedy thing and partly so it still has a slightly useful effect on a passed save.

[toapat]

And what about the metal variants?

well, you cant use Adamantium or Mithral as the material component, and every other metal i know of off the top of my head in this game is specifically for combat

[Chilingsworth]

And what about the metal variants?

I wrote the spell to create a "set of masterwork fullplate," I intended it to be capable of creating only that: a set of masterwork fullplate, made of normal steel.

[Chilingsworth]

I think of it this way: It was developed by a wizard (and not a gishy type of wizard, either.) Wizards think of heavy armor as a debuff, so it wasn't designed to be particularly useful as anything else.

[Grod_The_Giant]

and what i meant was that it was cost wise it was likely very powerful

You mean you can pay a bunch of experience to get a 1600 gold item that can be dispelled? Horror!

[toapat]

You mean you can pay a bunch of experience to get a 1600 gold item that can be dispelled? Horror!

how many fighters are going to have 30+ ranks in Know (arcana)?

who said your party was keeping the full plate?

[Chilingsworth]

how many fighters are going to have 30+ ranks in Know (arcana)?

who said your party was keeping the full plate?

Wouldn't that use only net you 800 gp?
(Well, ok, 1200 if you have someone with the Merchantile Background feat)

Still not worth the XP cost.

[toapat]

Wouldn't that use only net you 800 gp?
(Well, ok, 1200 if you have someone with the Merchantile Background feat)

Still not worth the XP cost.

XP costs can be entirely negated.

[Nightcanon]

If he ever goes wilderness adventuring with Fighters, Clerics, Paladins and the like, your wizard might find a demand for potions of Armor Up to tuck into pyjama pockets or under pillows. Or hats/ cloaks of same to pop on at short notice when a band of marauding ogres turns up in the middle of the night.

[Silva Stormrage]

XP costs can be entirely negated.

A lot of DM's find that Thought Bottle, getting high xp and material component spells as Spell Like Abilities, and other ways of getting free infinite xp to be fairly cheesy and often ban that. For most games you would have to pay the XP for permanency.

[Grod_The_Giant]

XP costs can be entirely negated.

If we're accepting that level of cheese, there are far, far larger concerns than a spell that makes a suit of masterwork plate.

[Sacrieur]

If we're accepting that level of cheese, there are far, far larger concerns than a spell that makes a suit of masterwork plate.

Like wishing for a whole house built of cheese.

[Almagesto]

I think of it this way: It was developed by a wizard (and not a gishy type of wizard, either.) Wizards think of heavy armor as a debuff, so it wasn't designed to be particularly useful as anything else.

OK, I agree with you on that one. However, maybe a greater version of the spell could consider them, right?

[Chilingsworth]

OK, I agree with you on that one. However, maybe a greater version of the spell could consider them, right?

maybe, though since I've yet to even try out this spell, considering a greater version might be premature.

[LordErebus12]

for the crafty:

cast Charm Person and convince the caster to put on a Ring of Arming (storing a suit of full plate) (magic item compendium pg 122).

wolla, you have the same basic "trapping" effect, without a save, but the caster can remove it in 2-5 minutes (assuming no one is helping).

Edit: however, they can merely unequip it, via the ring...

Edit: second thought, cursed ring, it only works one way...

[Kasbark]

This is a nice idea for a spell. I would lower it to 4th level to make it a bit more balanced.

Perhaps even 3rd level, and bump the casting time up to 1 round.