An obvious spell that should be in the books

[billking]

Mass Hold
Enchantment (Compulsion)
Level: Sor/Wiz 9
Targets: Any number of creatures no more than 30 ft apart

As hold monster, except as noted above.

 

[Ciaran]

Mass Hold
Enchantment (Compulsion)
Level: Sor/Wiz 9
Targets: Any number of creatures no more than 30 ft apart

As hold monster, except as noted above.

9th level seems awfully extreme, especially given that the far more flexible and useful mass charm is only 8th level.

- Eric

 

[twjensen]

Re: Re: An obvious spell that should be in the books

9th level seems awfully extreme, especially given that the far more flexible and useful mass charm is only 8th level.

Firing from the hip, but as I recall Hold Monster is one level higher than Charm Monster, thus, Mass Hold Monster should be one level higher than Mass Charm Monster, as specified.

 

[Admiral Ray]

Firing from the hip, but as I recall Hold Monster is one level higher than Charm Monster, thus, Mass Hold Monster should be one level higher than Mass Charm Monster, as specified.

Correct.

Hold Monster: Sor/Wiz 5
Charm Monster: Sor/Wiz 4

Based on that, 9th for Mass Hold sounds about right.

 

[Mal Malenkirk]

I think it would be better if it affected 1 target/level, none of which can be more than 20 feet apart. Or something along those lines.

 

[Cloudgatherer]

I agree with the 1 target/level restriction. I second that suggestion.

 

[billking]

Sorry about the slow reply time...
So i have one person saying "9th level is awful high". I have to disagree there; charm is a lower level ability than hold so I'd say that hold should be above 8th level, which unfortunately only gives us one option. (If there was an 8.5 level, I would have picked it.)
I also have two people saying "it should be 1 target/level," in other words, that it should be a weaker spell. Again, must disagree. For something that targets one creature/level a wizard might as well cast wail of the banshee and outright kill his enemies. Mass hold has a weaker effect, so only its differences from wail (Will save, nonsonic, possibly more targets, etc.) make it viable.
If one person thinks it's too weak and another group thinks it's too strong, then it's probably just about right. Of course, maybe someone has a real good point on why it should be weaker/stronger, if so speak up.

 

[DerianCypher]

It looks good to me... since the creatures must all be within 30 ft of eachother. I mean you can only fit so many creatures in a 30ft area.

 

[FireLance]

Reverse-engineering mass haste and mass suggestion, it seems as if changing a spell that affects a single creature to one that affects one creature/level, no two of which can be more than 30 ft. apart increases its level by 3.

Mass charm is 4 levels higher than charm monster, but it also loses a somatic component, effectively making it stilled (+1 level).

Mass invisibility is 5 levels higher than invisibility, but affects any number of creatures, no two of which can be more than 180 ft. apart. Hence, it does not really follow this template.

The only exception in the core rules is mass heal, which is two levels higher than heal. I believe there was a mass strength in one Dragon magazine, but I'm not sure if it followed this rule.

By this reasoning, mass hold should be 8th level, if hold monster is used as the base.

Actually, this suggests a new metamagic feat, Mass Spell, which will allow the spellcaster to modify a spell to affect one creature/level (all within 30 ft. of each other) at the cost of increasing the spell level by 3.

 

[Numion]

I think it's about right. Maybe they should've made a Mass Spell metamagic feat. Seems redundant to list 'massed' versions of the spells separately.