Assay Spell Resistance

[Felon]

If you're really worried about SR, Arcane Mastery (CArc 73) is the feat you want. It lets you take 10 on caster level checks. I'd rather spend a single feat than a truckload of 4th level slots and a spell known.
-blarg

That is actually a really good feat, well worth mentioning. But in the scenarios I'm hearing, the DM just wants to stack the deck so that some uber no-save spell probably fails. Taking 10 doesn't help if you need over a 10.

I just looked at some of the bigger demons with SR 32 (CR 19) a 19th lvl Cleric would still need to roll fairly low to bypass with this spell.

OK, stop here for a second. Consider what that cleric (or, better yet, wizard) would be going through without assay resistance. He either packed a bunch of summon monsters and other no-SR spells, which makes the matter moot, or he packed yes-SR spells and is going to fail 40% of the time.

 

[frankthedm]

I feel it is a cheap attempt to bypass SR, trivialising one of the mechanics that is supposed to make many high CR creatures difficult to fight.

It is even worse than any silly new conjuration spells which do masses of damage and 'oh, ignore SR because it is conjuration'.

That's my opinion.

I agree

 

[Felon]

I agree

Well, you're wrong. See exhaustive explanations above.

Boy, that felt good. I've sold curt glibness short all these years...I've got some good teachers here.

 

[Edena_of_Neith]

Combine Assay Spell Resistance with the original Irresistible Spell Feat from the Kalamar setting, and the campaign has a problem.
One removes SR. The other removes saves.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Combine Assay Spell Resistance with the original Irresistible Spell Feat from the Kalamar setting, and the campaign has a problem.
One removes SR. The other removes saves.

Just another of the many reasons why nobody in their right mind uses the Irresistible Spell Feat.

 

[WarlockLord]

Didn't they change that Irresistible Spell Feat?

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

I find it was a desperately needed addition to aid the underpowered evocation school, and welcome it whole-heartedly. Conjuration just kicks too much a@@ now. And, as someone mentioned, at level 1, True Casting may be more powerful. My group uses it tons. The best part? Caster level means nothing for it, so it's the cheesiest spell ever to get scrolls of for 25 gp a pop.

 

[Ogrork the Mighty]

This spell probably needs some additional limitations. Maybe make it 5th or even 6th level, or make it a ray spell that you have to hit the enemy spellcaster with (thematically, I like that better as it "burns" away the enemy's protection rather than buffing the caster).

That being said, neither of these options dramatically nerfs the spell.

An alternative might be a lesser bonus (+5?) at the same caster level vs. all SR (not just one target; afterall, it doesn't really make sense that the caster becomes good at penetrating the SR of only one creature; SR is SR). Or maybe a much shorter duration.

 

[mcgeedis]

That is actually a really good feat, well worth mentioning. But in the scenarios I'm hearing, the DM just wants to stack the deck so that some uber no-save spell probably fails. Taking 10 doesn't help if you need over a 10.

If you need to overcome spell resistance often in a campaign, assay spell resistance is nice. But, in a campaign that I played with lots of SR, I found Arcane Mastery to be much more useful. It was HUGE when dispelling magic as well. When combined with Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration, there was nothing that my sorcerer couldn't effect.

 

[Felon]

This spell probably needs some additional limitations. Maybe make it 5th or even 6th level, or make it a ray spell that you have to hit the enemy spellcaster with (thematically, I like that better as it "burns" away the enemy's protection rather than buffing the caster).

That being said, neither of these options dramatically nerfs the spell.

An alternative might be a lesser bonus (+5?) at the same caster level vs. all SR (not just one target; afterall, it doesn't really make sense that the caster becomes good at penetrating the SR of only one creature; SR is SR). Or maybe a much shorter duration.

I'm not sure why you don't think it makes sense to have a divination spell that shows the weak point in a specific creature's SR--after all, it's not like the specific nature of SR is well-explained.

Bumping up the spell level doesn't really do much to allay whatever reservations people have against it. If they feel that mages should just have to take SR on the chin, bumping the level won't matter to them.

But the ray idea's not bad. I had a similar idea for a spell that can damages the target if it penetrates and, whether or not it penetrate, chips away at the SR. I also think the idea of having a spell that reduces SR against a specific category of spells based on school (evocation) or spell level (only spells 4th-level or lower) is worthwhile.