Stylistic/
I'm not so keen on the use of '
changes the Spellcraft Prerequisite;' it seems a little imprecise. I can understand your wish to avoid double negatives - the reason that I continued to use them was because of my understanding of precedent in the way penalties are expressed in official produsts; I might be misremembering, though - perhaps there is no such precedent.
I can also understand the reason for you wanting to get rid of the phrase "add +2 to..." - I suspect the tautology frustrates you, even though its mathematical certainty is not in doubt. Also, if we are removing the phrase "the Spellcraft Prerequisite is reduced by -X," them a consistent style demands that we also remove its opposite.
I submit that
change is not the way to accomplish this, however. I also feel that there is a certain benefit from having a '+' or '-' sign in the body of the text, so it can be scanned quickly. I think this is reader-friendly. FWIW, I've also been frustrated by the inaccuracy of "reduce by [a negative]," but I've let it slide (for reasons I've noted).
We need to find a convention which works, though.
/stylistic.
Quote:
|
I was a bit whimsical in the section that emulates blindness; I chose to require multiple saves, and to allow the same sense to be targeted more than once. This blunts the "save negates" part of the spell an awful lot.
|
I'm pretty sceptical about this: it begs for a "prompt multiple saving throws" factor.
I would suggest that the base curse targets a single sense, but the curse is impervious to nonepic magic: 'removing the affliction is beyond the normal scope of even
wish and
miracle; only an epic spell incorporating the [dispel] seed has a chance of ending a curse bestowed by the [afflict] seed.'
I would rate this factor as a +8; maybe a +6 allows a 'partially effective wish' - as in the case of
imprisonment. Beyond the
normal scope of
wish and
miracle places it in the DM's hands, if he wants to allow these spells to work.
Wish is into dangerous territory with unpredictable side-effects; the
miracle required is a great effort for one's patron deity to accomplish.
An [afflict] spell which was bolstered by factors which made it resist attempts to dispel it would be nigh-unbreakable: a feat which faciltated this would be cool, too. Maybe factors which resist
dispel attempts could be cheaper for [afflict]. I think an unbreakable curse is a worthy model for this seed - maybe the size of the penalty is not so important as its unshakeability.
I think [afflict] should be (D), as well.