Changing spell effects?

[Asmor]

I was kind of wondering... Has anyone ever tried changing spell effects so that they're themed. For example, a necromancer's magic missile might take the form of black skulls cackling as they shoot towards their target. An ice-themed mage might shoot a frostball instead of a fireball, doing cold damage instead of fire.

Do you think there are unforseen consequences? I imagine in general converting between different energy types shouldn't be too bad, but what if you wanted to change a fireball so it deals slashing/piercing/bludgeoning damage? Would that affect things negatively?

Basically, I ask because I want to design an NPC based on an anime character, a thief named Psyren from FullMetal Alchemist who used playing cards to form swords and as projectiles and such. All of this NPC's spells would revolve around cards. Fly, for example, would take the form of cards forming a staircase or walkway in the air for him to step on and shield would consist of a flurry of cards buffetting around the caster.

So has anyone tried something similar to this? How did it work out? Does it sound interesting? Can you think of any unforseen sideeffects?

 

[Sammael]

I was kind of wondering... Has anyone ever tried changing spell effects so that they're themed. For example, a necromancer's magic missile might take the form of black skulls cackling as they shoot towards their target.

There is a feat called Spell Thematics from Magic of Faerun and Player's Guide to Faerun thta does this. Aside from changing a spell's looks, it also provides a caster level bonus for a couple of "themed" spells.

An ice-themed mage might shoot a frostball instead of a fireball, doing cold damage instead of fire.

Balance-wise, this is fine, and I would certainly allow a player to start with (or develop) a frostball instead of fireball. Note that there is a feat (yes, again) called Energy Substitution that allows a caster to change energy spells so they use a different type of energy. This is an essential feat for energy-themed casters, since most enemy casters whose spellbooks they'll acquire will have core spells.

Do you think there are unforseen consequences? I imagine in general converting between different energy types shouldn't be too bad, but what if you wanted to change a fireball so it deals slashing/piercing/bludgeoning damage? Would that affect things negatively?

Very much so. A 3rd level spell wthat deals 1d6 per level weapon damage to an area is horribly unbalanced. Consider that such a spell should no longer be subject to SR, creatures that have energy resistances and immunities aren't protected from it, and even creatures with DR are toast - DR 10/whatever is insignificant when a mage can toss a spell that does 10d6 damage to it.

I'd change the spell's level to at least 5th, if not higher.

 

[Li Shenron]

Absolutely I have done this before and encouraged my players to do exactly the same. You should indeed consider when the changes are in the effect and not just the visualization.

1) Cosmetic changes.

I give near-absolute freedom about this. I never cared AT ALL about Spell Thematics, as long as the changes are purely cosmetic, they should be free for everyone. The only limitations I would try to keep are:

- to choose a theme and stick to it (i mean don't allow to change it later); it doesn't have to be the same theme for ALL your spells, but a caster with an identifyable style still has more chances to become memorable than one with no style at all; if you allow it to be changed at every cast, it may happen that someone tries to use any spell as illusions or to raise a wide range of reactions from bystanders
- avoid extreme effects on both ends of the range: Magic Missiles in the shape of Great Wyrm Red Dragons charging the target aren't fine, because they are obviously overachieving effects they aren't supposed to; effects reduced to the point of not being visible at all (for spells which are supposed to be visible) aren't fine either since they can become too useful

2) Effective changes.

Definitely keep it simple. Changing from one energy type to another is absolutely fine, it is actually the perfect example. Check for some spells' side effects (combustion, freezing of water, melting some material) which you may want to substitute with something that makes more sense.

You can also change from an energy type to a non-energy damage, in which case it is more complicated because energy resistances don't work like damage reduction. Energy resistance is very common and very high, and some are outright immune to one or more energies.
A Fireball which deals slashing damage would bypass all energy resistances, so you should try to apply a different sort of resistance: first option would be DR, but how? You may consider the damage magic and slashing. In that case creatures with DR X/magic (lots) or DR X/slashing (few) will be fully affected, while the ones with DR X/Evil for example would get the "discount".
It is a difficult topic however: DR is never as high as ER, and it is not straightforward.
Not to mention that changing from Fire to Force has even more to consider...

 

[F.C.Desoya]

I encourage my spellcasting players to have their spells look as they choose....one sorcerer has all of his magic missles appear to be rainbows (of course when he is out for a session the group makes them look like screaming pink kittens!) Makes for more interesting roleplay in my opinion.

I would not let the spell effects change at all....if it deals a particular type of damage I would keep it that way and just allow them to change the appearance. Letting them change energy types at will would be to powerful especially around monsters with different energy resistances. If they wanted to do that I would encourage that they take the Energy Substitution feat to keep the balance.

Just two cents from a long time lurker

 

[maddman75]

Spell Thematics is the worst kind of feat. It restricts imagination and creativity. I hate for everyone's magic missile to look the same. Cosmetic changes are not only fine, but encouraged. Forbidding players from adding such flavor to their character's actions without a special feat is absurd.

 

[Sammael]

I hate for everyone's magic missile to look the same.

Does the look of magic missile honestly come up in your games with any kind of frequency?

Besides, Spell Thematics does a lot more than change the look of spells.

 

[Tonguez]

I based my entire homebrew magic system on changing the Thematics of spells on he basis that 2d6 damage from a fireball (fire) should be the same as 2d6 from a 'rain of thorns' (piercing).

The problem with the current system however is as stated ER and DR work differently (and Force is more effective than other energy types). This is where a feat would be required

As to your card idea I'd reason that they were mainly Force effects and build my spell list accordingly

 

[Asmor]

Letting them change energy types at will would be to powerful especially around monsters with different energy resistances.

It's not at will... The spell would be learned differently, and all spells would follow that theme. If anything, I think it would make the caster weaker since they don't have any versatility in the sorts of damage they can do.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I agree with much of the above. Spell Thematics is one of the worst feats I can imagine, because the idea it is supposed to emulate (that certain wizards, when they cast "the same spell," have somewhat different effects) is already tacitly a part of the rules.

Specifically, you cannot auto-identify an opposing spellcaster's spell if it's one you already know. You need to make a Spellcraft check; otherwise, a Spot or Listen check should be sufficient. Therefore, there must be some difference between Wizard A's Mage Armor and Wizard B's Mage Armor.

There are certain similarities, certainly - enough that someone trained in the magical arts (i.e., having ranks in Spellcraft) can pick them out. Some of these include the necessary material components.

For instance, the components of the Mage Armor spell are a few mystic words (V), a series of gestures (S), and a piece of cured leather (F).

Wizard A is an Elf, trained in the tradition of the Elven High Mages. When he casts a Mage Armor spell, he pulls a leaf-shaped piece of elkhide from his pouch and passes it twice around his head, intoning a cadence of mystic syllables. A field of force similar in appearence to Elf-crafted mail shimmers into appearance around him, and just as quickly fades from view.

Wizard B is a firemage from the desertlands. When he casts Mage Armor, he pulls a cured square of camel hide, taken from the hump of a dromedary, from his pouch, and makes a mystic pass over it. When he speaks a mystic phrase, a rune glows briefly on the hide and causes smoke to rise into the air. The smoke, moved by eldritch winds, moves into position around the wizard's body, briefly defining a barrier before blowing away.

To the untrained, there is no certain way to determine what spell the wizard has cast, though someone intelligent and observant might guess it to be some form of warding. A trained eye, however, can pick out the magical fundamentals that make the spell do what it does, and correctly determine that the spell is a minor abjuration, meant to mimic the effects of a well-made suit of armor.