Epic Spellcasting

[Sepulchrave II]

'Touch' may be the way to go with a base range. Or 'Touch or Personal' - if there was no differentiation in terms of the DC between them.

I like the idea of using benchmark spells, because these are also, in many cases, the 'iconic' spells of D&D as well - I think that maintaining flavour would be very easy. A quick look in the ELH at seeds, and some suggested spells as the original root spell:

Afflict - bane (1)
Animate - animate objects (6)
Animate Dead - animate dead (4)
Armor - mage armor (1)
Banish - dismissal (5)
Compel - lesser geas or charm monster (4)
Conceal - invisibility (2)
Conjure - minor creation (4)
Contact - telepathic bond (5)
Delude - silent image (1)
Destroy - disintegrate (6)
Dispel - dispel magic (3)
Energy - fireball or lightning bolt (3)
Foresee - augury (1, but the root spell has a 1 minute casting time)
Fortify - bull's strength (2)
Heal - heal (6)
Life - resurrection (7)
Reflect - spell turning (7)
Reveal - clairvoyance (3)
Slay - finger of death (7)
Summon - summon monster I (1)
Transform - polymorph (4)
Transport - greater teleport (7)
Ward - endure elements (1)


I think a lot can be done with these seeds - in terms of expanding their versatility and application: this job was really half-finished by the development team at WotC. And some were stretched too far (time stop from transport), anyone?

But new seeds are definitely in order as well - for flavour as much as for completeness. Distinction between charm and compel would be nice; between call and summon; a weather seed; a stupefy seed (sleep, symbol of sleep); a wrack seed (symbol of pain); a repel seed (repel metal or stone, antipathy); a genesis seed; a specific enervate seed; a specific time seed (time stop, temporal stasis). In fact, nearly every spell in the PHB should be capable of being replicated through a combination of seeds and factors. And it should be both logical and intuitive.

I think we need to look at each spell and ask 'can I create that, combining x, y, z etc.)
If the answer is 'no,' then we need to find out what the missing component is, and see if any other spells share that missing component. In many cases, I think that existing seeds can assume this burden - it does mean rewriting most (probably all) of them. In others, new seeds will need to be contrived.

E.g. fortify (as written) has no provision for increasing a skill score. This is easily remediable, and in fact if the scope of existing seeds was expanded, the number of ad hoc adjudications on DC would decrease accordingly.

 

[Trainz]

Well, the spell in question was a 60 foot radius 30d6 fireball. 3rd level spell, maximized (+3) and empowered (+2) and double widened (+6) makes a 14th level spell, which can't be done under the non-epic rules. Even if you did normal spell progression beyond 20th, that would be a 27th level caster. Considering some progressions slow down after 20th level, that might even be 37th level.

Also note that a 35th level wizard has a spellcraft of about 48, which means he can cast the spell automatically. The spell can be achieved 50% of the time by a 25th level wizard.

So it doesn't totally fail, and 60 ft 30d6 fireball isn't really the point of epic spellcasting, it's just an example, so you can't use that to say it's for nothing.

Right. I understand what you say and somewhat agree with you.

That said, when you stop to think about it, 30d6 to a bunch of monsters is still just 30d6 to a bunch of monsters, at 15th v.s. 25th (with a 50% spell failure at that, by your own admission). The radius plays little when comparing lethality. This, I have a problem with. And with added complexity in game terms, not a very palatable option IMC.

 

[Phasmus]

I am concerned with the dichotomy between taking existing spells for use as seeds (an idea I like) and standardizing the casting time/duration/range/etc components of the seeds (an idea I also like).

The problem is that spell level is determined partially by issues of range, casting time, etc. So, for example, the disintegrate spell probably wouldn't be 6 spell levels if it had a range of touch and a one minute casting time. On the other hand, for example assuming you wanted to use 'identify' as a spell seed, decreasing the casting time to one minute would technically give you a spell with an effect higher than a first level spell's.

I fear that the result of changing spell seed time/space parameters while maintaining spell levels will be spell seed costs that do not accurately reflect the relative power levels of the individual seeds.

 

[Anabstercorian]

Well, it's simple enough to tweak the Spellcraft DC values of the seeds if you're tweaking the spells the seeds they're based off of.

 

[Phasmus]

Well, it's simple enough to tweak the Spellcraft DC values of the seeds if you're tweaking the spells the seeds they're based off of.

Agreed, I was just trying to indicate that it seems like a necessary step to consider.

I hope I haven't killed the topic in the process of doing so. This is a line of inquiry with significant potential, I think.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Agreed, I was just trying to indicate that it seems like a necessary step to consider.

I hope I haven't killed the topic in the process of doing so. This is a line of inquiry with significant potential, I think.

Don't worry- the topic is not dead. I haven't contributed because I don't have the time right now to sit down and really work through some of the issues raised. One big question relates to the weather seed and what factors can be applied to it - it is basically the question of what apocalyptic spells are feasible. Another other big question (for me at least) relates to the whole question of mitigating factors, especially the involvement of other casters. A third question would be to define seeds (as per Sep's suggestions) and a way of combining them so that certain epic effects could be produced around specified levels (again, as per Sep's suggestions). It seems likely that some system could be worked out that will approximate these goals- but it would take a lot of trial and error to make it work out.

On a side note, Upper_Krust's Immortal's Handbook is supposed to have an alternative epic system. I must admit that I am hesitant to get deeply into this project when U_K's system is likely to be superior to anything I could cobble together.

 

[Trainz]

No feedback on the system I proposed on page two ?

I'd like to know how it feels at first sight, because one of my player's is a Sorceror, and they're making their steady way towards epicness.

 

[Kerrick]

1.) Get rid of the 'take 10' mechanic on epic spellcasting. Its superfluous. You need to actually restructure the Epic Spell DCs to account for this.

Level-based takes care of that quite nicely.

2) Because the Epic Spellcasting Score (ESS hereafter) is based on Spellcraft ranks (not total score), Skill Focus (Spellcraft) and Epic Skill Focus (Spellcraft) become irrelevant. I would suggest replacing them with a stackable Epic Feat which increases the ESS.

See #1.

8) Have a flexible formula for development. More time = less money. Less time = more money. XP cost should be constant (although lower than presently).

If by this you mean talking longer than usual to develop the spell for less money, I agree. You’d have to figure the XP cost off the original spell before you start tinkering with the development time, though.

-Backlash damage shouldn't last the duration of the spell!!

Yes it should – it keeps players from using it arbitrarily as a “quickie” mitigating factor to get the spell down to where they can cast it. It’s best used for instantaneous effects; stuff like rituals is best used for longer-lasting spells.

-We're missing seeds! I need to create a 'prismatic' seed in order to make a reasonable Prismatic Armor spell. There isn't much dealing with time- I mean, there's Transport, but it barely touches the subject. Etc. We could do with a list of 'missing' seed types, methinks.

No you don’t – you just need the Energy seed.

Missing seed types… Hmm… Here are the ones I added: Entrapment (stuff like hold, imprisonment, etc.), Space (create space like Mord’s mansion spell), Time, and Weather (split off from Energy) … I also combined, altered, and split a lot of the others – Afflict became a combo of contagion and bestow curse; Armor, Reflect, and Ward were folded into Protection; and Delude and Conceal became Illusion.

Similarly the mitigating factors for epic spells need to be scrutinized, especially the contributions by secondary casters. Especially simulacrums and cohorts.

Simple enough – what we did was rule that only living or undead casters can contribute to a ritual – no simulacra. Cohorts are another problem entirely, but one that our group hasn’t encountered, so I can’t really say how it could be “fixed”.

One of the characters in my campaign suggested summoning a slew of Immoths with multiple summon monster IX spells and deploying them in a ritual context. I said 'no,' but justifying it is difficult.

There’s a rule for it somewhere, in 3.5. If you want to justify it, simply point to the inor and major creation spells – created items cannot be used as spell components. If you follow the same vein of logic, summoned creatures cannot be used as sacrifices in a ritual.

There should simply be a number of spell levels contributed --> mitigating factor relationship.

Again, that’s the way we do it, and it works. Our version is this – each caster in the ritual has to contribute a number of spell levels in open spell slot, at least one of which must be half or more of the total (round up). So, for instance, if each caster had to contribute 10 levels, they would all have to chip in a 5th-level slot. The other 5 levels could be a 2nd and a 3rd, a 1st and a 4th, or any other combination of non-0-level spells adding up to 5.

This is really tricky, and depends on what you consider to be the realistic 'upper end' of Epic Levels. 40? 60? 100!!? I'm inclined to say 40-50. Characters ought to be thinking about deification after that.

The problem with this is that everyone has their own idea of what the “ceiling” should be. If you go with the idea that there Is no ceiling, you’ll be a lot better off, as spells will be able to scale infinitely a lot more easily. This, I think in part, is why the epic system breaks down.

But the Wiz 20/ Cleric 15 would at least get some breaks in the spellcasting arena if Epic Spells weren't based on caster level. None of their nonepic spells will have any punch against most CR 30+ monsters, and even with Epic Spells they'd have to use factors to penetrate SR.

Not really, if you go with the idea that ESS = total spellcasting level. You wiz/clr would then cast epic spells (NOT normal spells) as a 35th level caster – more than enough to handle those CR 30 monsters.

To help multi-classed spellcasters, make the ESS (epic spellcasting score) equal to their total of all their effective spellcaster level in all their classes. So a Wiz 20/Cleric 15 would have an ESS of 35, a Paladin 12/Sorcerer 18 would have an ESS of 24, and so on.

…

Making it based on effective caster level removes most magic items and feats from the equation.

Exactly. I like the ESS = total levels thing. That’s the way we do it, and it works out quite well. And, of course, you have to be able to cast 9th-level spells.

Hmm, I dunno. It seems kind of clunky. If the Epic Spellcasting Score is a function of the Epic Spellcasting feat (c.f. Leadership), then it's kind of nonsensical to have it as a prereq. for the feat itself - kind of like saying you have to have a Leadership score of 6 in order to qualify for the Leadership feat.

How is it clunky? It’s very simple, and very elegant. You add up all the spellcasting levels you have, and if they total 21 or more, you can take the feat. Seems simple enough to me…

If we're dealing with smaller numbers, then these need to be changed to accomodate.

That’s what I did with my system – I took the modifiers listed and halved most of them to start, then adjusted them from there as the situation required.

I have to say, I'm dubious about the idea of exactly replicating any nonepic spell: I favour the idea of a number of seeds - albeit a larger number than present. I also favour a flat 1-minute casting time, whatever the seed, and preferably a congruence in range, area of effect etc. - simply because when you combine seeds, you then only have a single baseline to work from, rather than 2, 3 or 4 ranges; effects, targets, rays, emanations etc.. This was my original reason for having all seeds with a range of 'personal,' and a duration of either 'instantaneous' or '20 rounds.' Streamlining.

Okay, rather than take up a huge amount of space quoting each point, I left it as is. The first point I agree with - see y comments on the elements above. The second point – the base casting time for all elements (except for Weather, at 10 minutes) is 1 minute. Range, duration, etc. are a little more difficult. I simply rule that a spell uses the characteristics of the base spell, like in the ELH. Ruling that all seeds start with a range of personal and a duration of instant or 20 rounds is trimming it down too far, IMO.

Here's a proposed alternative for Epic spells, totally unrelated to the current ELH rules.

I’m sorry, but I this doesn’t seem very epic to me – all you’re doing is taking the base spells and making them bigger. It might work for a feat or set of feats, but not for an entirely new system. I want to be able to do things that you can’t do with normal spells – that, to me, is what epic is all about.

I like the idea of using benchmark spells…

As do I. I, however, used the highest level spell, instead of the lowest. My rationale is that a legendary spell should be able to do anything any lower-level spell of the same type can do, and then the adjustments can be made upon that to do more (or you can combine other elements to achieve additional, greater effects).

 

[Anabstercorian]

I think it would be better to abandon any reference to actual spells when creating the building blocks of the epic system - The seeds should be more flexible than any spell could realistically be.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Bump.

In case anyone has had an epiphany in the last few months...