Spells for research

GnomeWorks · May 29, 2005

I'd still like to see specified if all those effects take place if the spell is cast as a higher-level spell, or only one, as I'm still confused on that point.

Otherwise, looks good to me.

Knight Otu · May 29, 2005

Is it better now?

GnomeWorks · May 29, 2005

Yes, muchly. Thanks!

I already gave my approval, so no need to give it again. But I approve of them.

Knight Otu · Jul 17, 2005

Quick Bump.

orsal · Jul 17, 2005

I vote Yes to Ashnar's Mark and Sparkstrike. As for the third spell, I don't like the internal metamagic either, just because it's not the way the core rules generally handle spells with multi-level variants. In the interest of eschewing obfuscatory complexity, I'd suggest making three different spells, such as Lesser PE, PE, and Greater PE. Just because that's the standard way to achieve the same effect. Oh, and I want to think a little more about the appropriate level(s) for that one before voting on it.

Erekose13 · Jul 26, 2005

I'd second orsal's suggestion of splitting the last one into three spells. I like all of them, and I think they are all balanced as written. The internal metamagic is an awkward way to achieve what you are looking for and I think that three seperate spells would be the way to go.

Knight Otu · Jul 28, 2005

It propably is for the best in the end, so consider it done.

Erekose13 · Jul 30, 2005

Look good to me

orsal · Jul 30, 2005

I vote Yes to the three grades of Ashnar's Pyromagical Enhancement. (I already voted to approve the other two spells in this thread.)

Patlin · Nov 16, 2005

Yes to Sparkstrike and Friend's Mark.

The pyromagical enhancement spells seem a bit complicated to me, especially the none of the above condition. While this spell is up, you could cast mage armor on someone and deal fire damage to them? That seems odd. I think this spell is effecting other spells in ways that should be left to metamagic feats. I shall abstain on these for now.