reapersaurus
First Post
The Smite spell was a big mistake.
It makes a cleric able to smite evil more often, and better than a paladin.
It makes a cleric able to smite evil more often, and better than a paladin.
Relics & Rituals: spells balanced?
Killer Shrike
First Post
By and large I have been very happy with the book and would recommend the spells portion. The magic items section however gets a 'proceed at your own risk' warning however. Many are pretty over the top.
Another thing to look out for is obsoletism. R & R was written fairly early on in the d20 OGL releases, and several 'official' WoTC products such as Magic of Faerun and Tome and Blood have been released since. Some of the concepts in R&R may have analogous equivalents in the newer product.
Also, its been awhile, but as I recall, there is some rules inconsistencies in the R&R material; for example I think there are several fire spells, some of which present thier own method of resolving fire and burning. I could be wrong however; its been a long time since I actually did more than use R&R as a reference when picking new spells for a PC as a player or designing an interesting new NPC as a DM.
Some of the spells do seem a bit uber, but for the most part close examination will reveal a flaw or downside to such spells that balance them out a bit; for example the 3rd level Dragons Breath seems like it should be at least a 4th level spell as it is just better than L-Bolt and F-Ball, until you read the material components and realize that the caster takes a point of damage per die of damage inflicted by the Dragon's Breath. Plus you have to get close to use it. Talk about a recipe for disaster.
It should be fine to use the arcane spells as is minus DM veto rights. As far as the divine spells go however, the concern I have always had about adding in new ones is that since divine casters have open access to spells of a given spell level, the addition of new 'spells' (ie granted abilities from thier respective deities) to thier list is really illogical and in many ways unbalancing. Arcane casters are inherently limited to the number of spells they can know; even a wizard cant know all spells of all levels he has access to; so adding new arcane spells has minimal impact on game balance as long as those spells are allocated to the correct levels and schools. In contrast to this, every divine spell addition on becomes a sudden and immediate universal addition to the repetoire of countless divine casters across the game world. On the otherhand, just giving those spells to PCs is rampant PC-ism and may even unbalance the CR system if abused.
Therefore, my ruling on adding divine spells is straightforward: I allow 1 for 1 spell swaps as appropriate to the applicable dieties schtick rather than universal addition and access. The decision to swap a spell must be made when access to the applicable new spell level is acheived and all swaps must be approved.
Additionally, though no player has yet earned such, I also intend to give access to select new 'spells' as story awards in lieu of some XP when/if a PC divine caster does something way over-and-beyond reasonable expectations while in the service of thier faith/belief.
Another thing to look out for is obsoletism. R & R was written fairly early on in the d20 OGL releases, and several 'official' WoTC products such as Magic of Faerun and Tome and Blood have been released since. Some of the concepts in R&R may have analogous equivalents in the newer product.
Also, its been awhile, but as I recall, there is some rules inconsistencies in the R&R material; for example I think there are several fire spells, some of which present thier own method of resolving fire and burning. I could be wrong however; its been a long time since I actually did more than use R&R as a reference when picking new spells for a PC as a player or designing an interesting new NPC as a DM.
Some of the spells do seem a bit uber, but for the most part close examination will reveal a flaw or downside to such spells that balance them out a bit; for example the 3rd level Dragons Breath seems like it should be at least a 4th level spell as it is just better than L-Bolt and F-Ball, until you read the material components and realize that the caster takes a point of damage per die of damage inflicted by the Dragon's Breath. Plus you have to get close to use it. Talk about a recipe for disaster.
It should be fine to use the arcane spells as is minus DM veto rights. As far as the divine spells go however, the concern I have always had about adding in new ones is that since divine casters have open access to spells of a given spell level, the addition of new 'spells' (ie granted abilities from thier respective deities) to thier list is really illogical and in many ways unbalancing. Arcane casters are inherently limited to the number of spells they can know; even a wizard cant know all spells of all levels he has access to; so adding new arcane spells has minimal impact on game balance as long as those spells are allocated to the correct levels and schools. In contrast to this, every divine spell addition on becomes a sudden and immediate universal addition to the repetoire of countless divine casters across the game world. On the otherhand, just giving those spells to PCs is rampant PC-ism and may even unbalance the CR system if abused.
Therefore, my ruling on adding divine spells is straightforward: I allow 1 for 1 spell swaps as appropriate to the applicable dieties schtick rather than universal addition and access. The decision to swap a spell must be made when access to the applicable new spell level is acheived and all swaps must be approved.
Additionally, though no player has yet earned such, I also intend to give access to select new 'spells' as story awards in lieu of some XP when/if a PC divine caster does something way over-and-beyond reasonable expectations while in the service of thier faith/belief.
Holy Bovine
First Post
reapersaurus said:
I agree - I changed smite so that it is available only to paladins. Gives them a little more options in using their smite power (that i always hated it was usable only once per day - now the paladin can memorize smite and use it more - not unbalancing in my campaign but YMMV).
James McMurray
First Post
As I mentioned in my post, Sacrifice spell is too powerful for the simple reason that it can be maximized. Spellfire (that I know of) cannot be maximized. And even if it can, I've always though spellfire was too powerful as well.
Spellfire
The 'matter of fact' tone of marking Spellfire as 'broken' is a bit unwarrented; i have yet to hear a substantive argument as to why it is in any way overpowered to begin with; both because its advantage, much like the ranger's favored enemy, is passive and a other conditions that makes it's efficient applications......incidental to say the least, especially at higher levels.
The 'matter of fact' tone of marking Spellfire as 'broken' is a bit unwarrented; i have yet to hear a substantive argument as to why it is in any way overpowered to begin with; both because its advantage, much like the ranger's favored enemy, is passive and a other conditions that makes it's efficient applications......incidental to say the least, especially at higher levels.
Victim
First Post
Atonement is nothing like Convert.
The change alignment portion of Atonement that you're thinking of works only on someone who is willing and and in control of their faculties. In other words, you can convert someon if they want to be converted.
Convert FORCES the subject to change gods and alignment if they fail the save. If you can take the time without getting killed or interupted, you can convert someone who wants to kill you.
I love sunspear as well. Of course, my cleric of Lathander would probably call it dawspear. Healing, damage, and magic weapons all in one handy package. Of course, Searing light is about as good some levels normally, and is much better against undead. Sunspear does scale nicely, though. At 20th level, 2d4+45 damage with no save really nice for a 3rd level spell. They should probably cap it, probably in the +20 to +30 damage range.
The change alignment portion of Atonement that you're thinking of works only on someone who is willing and and in control of their faculties. In other words, you can convert someon if they want to be converted.
Convert FORCES the subject to change gods and alignment if they fail the save. If you can take the time without getting killed or interupted, you can convert someone who wants to kill you.
I love sunspear as well. Of course, my cleric of Lathander would probably call it dawspear. Healing, damage, and magic weapons all in one handy package. Of course, Searing light is about as good some levels normally, and is much better against undead. Sunspear does scale nicely, though. At 20th level, 2d4+45 damage with no save really nice for a 3rd level spell. They should probably cap it, probably in the +20 to +30 damage range.
Similar Threads
