Creating New Spells?

[Infiniti2000]

Casting Time: 1 swift action

IMO, allowing Swift spells is a big deal. If persistent spell is in use in the campaign and the DM allows it on Swift spells, then no can do.

Range: Self

There's no such thing. You probably intend "Personal" as others have listed.

Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes

If you use a range of "personal", you drop these two sections. You don't roll a save and SR doesn't even apply.

Additionally, the grappled creature may make an immediate grapple check (or escape artist check) to break free of the grapple.

Up to this point, it looked fine, but I don't understand this at all. It makes zero thematic sense and thus I would strike it from the spell.

What do you think? I removed the somatic component, thinking as a swift action with the bow drawn, it just wouldn't really work otherwise.

But for the same reason you need to remove the focus.

And I really like the idea of granting the extra grapple/escape artist check. Gives some extra kick to the spell. That's why I think it works as a 2nd level spell now.

So, you want to injure an opponent and then release it from your ally's grapple? How does that make sense at all? The only way I can see that to be useful is to use a healing arrow on your ally who got grappled by a huge creature. I don't agree with it at all. Getting rid of it, I think that 2nd level is maybe right. Not always useful, but the 1 round / level and swift action will be much more useful than true strike.

My concern is that it's too low a level. You are basically negating the advantage of an opponent's grapple for 1 round / level. Combine this spell with disintegrate, etc. and a 2nd level spell eliminates a large number of creature's main advantage. I'm starting to think that 3rd level would be better (given swift).

 

[TracerBullet42]

IMO, allowing Swift spells is a big deal. If persistent spell is in use in the campaign and the DM allows it on Swift spells, then no can do.

Gonna have to disagree with you there...persistent spell raises this spell level by 6. So an 8th level spell slot to negate the change of hitting your ally in a grapple for a full day? Compare that to other 8th level spells...is it so bad?

There's no such thing. You probably intend "Personal" as others have listed.

Agreed, I need to work on my phrasology.

If you use a range of "personal", you drop these two sections. You don't roll a save and SR doesn't even apply.

D'oh, of course.

Up to this point, it looked fine, but I don't understand this at all. It makes zero thematic sense and thus I would strike it from the spell.

I suppose I should note that the idea of this is aiding your ally who is grappled. When I started thinking of this spell, it's intent was of a defensive nature. For the record, the campaign in which I wish to use it is comprised of a party of all halflings. Halflings tend to get grappled...a lot. So I wanted a spell that would aid my PC in helping my comrades not get carried off so much.

But for the same reason you need to remove the focus.

Agreed.

So, you want to injure an opponent and then release it from your ally's grapple? How does that make sense at all? The only way I can see that to be useful is to use a healing arrow on your ally who got grappled by a huge creature. I don't agree with it at all. Getting rid of it, I think that 2nd level is maybe right. Not always useful, but the 1 round / level and swift action will be much more useful than true strike.

No, the idea is to help free my ally, not the opponent.

My concern is that it's too low a level. You are basically negating the advantage of an opponent's grapple for 1 round / level. Combine this spell with disintegrate, etc. and a 2nd level spell eliminates a large number of creature's main advantage. I'm starting to think that 3rd level would be better (given swift).

What if the spell was relegated to physical attacks? As a multi-classed caster, I don't see my PC ever learning disintegrate or anything like that anyway...

Anyway...would like to hear more ideas regarding a spell like this. Y'all are seeing things that I am not, which is helpful.

 

[IcyCool]

I see no reason this spell can't have a 1 hour per level duration. Mage armor has that, and it gives a better (and more useful) benefit. The suggestion of making it a swift action with a 1 round per level duration is also a decent one.

Edit - I posted before I read the 2nd-level version of the spell. My comments apply only to the 1st level spell.

 

[TracerBullet42]

Alrighty...here's a new version of the spell proposed by FCWesel...the DM of the game...(and the PC's name is Verus Horne, in case you couldn't tell)

Verus Horne's Meticulous Precision
Divination
Level: Sor/Wiz 2, Rgr 1
Components: V, F
Casting Time: 1 Standard action
Range: Personal
Duration: Special

This spell guides ranged attacks to strike true, even into a tangled wrestling match. The creature can fire a ranged attack into a grapple and, if it hits, strike the intended target without having a chance to hit any other targets within the grapple.

The duration of the spell lasts for a number of ranged attacks equal to the Class Levels plus Wisdom Modifier of the character or 10 minutes, which ever comes first. So if Verus Horne is Wiz 2 and has a WIS bonus of 2, he gets a total four attack rolls within a 10-minute periode with the effect of the spell in place.

Spell Focus: a small golden arrowhead charm (1gp value)

 

[FCWesel]

There's something to keep in mind with all of this.

FranktheDm reminded us of the feat:

Improved Precise Shot [General]
Prerequisites
Dex 19, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, base attack bonus +11.

Under those guidelines, a straight-up Wizard/Sorcerer (below Epic) could NEVER take that Feat and thus NEVER be capable of avoiding the random-grapple-target dilema.

The spell above allows a 3rd level Wizard to avoid that for a few attacks.


We even talked about it NOT being a Wiz/Sor spell at all but a Ranger spell only. (And possibly a Assassin spell.)

 

[TracerBullet42]

IMO, allowing Swift spells is a big deal. If persistent spell is in use in the campaign and the DM allows it on Swift spells, then no can do.

An interesting coincidence I just noticed...if the spell were to be "persistent" a wizard would have to be 15th level...the exact same level that the PC in question would qualify for Improved Precise Shot...

Spooky.

 

[TracerBullet42]

Now I am going to sound mean, but I'd say a spell like this needs to be several levels higher. It helps the archer rogue capitalize far too much on an ally rigged to grapple.

Perhaps the spell description could also include something about not allowing for precision damage?

Verus Horne's Meticulous Precision
Divination
Level: Sor/Wiz 2, Rgr 1
Components: V, F
Casting Time: 1 Standard action
Range: Personal
Duration: Special

This spell guides ranged attacks to strike true, even into a tangled wrestling match. The creature can fire a ranged attack into a grapple and, if it hits, strike the intended target without having a chance to hit any other targets within the grapple. Due to the tangled nature, however, no precision damage may be included on such an attack.

The duration of the spell lasts for a number of ranged attacks equal to the Class Levels plus Wisdom Modifier of the character or 10 minutes, which ever comes first. So if Verus Horne is Wiz 2 and has a WIS bonus of 2, he gets a total four attack rolls within a 10-minute periode with the effect of the spell in place.

Spell Focus: a small golden arrowhead charm (1gp value)

 

[Infiniti2000]

A couple more comments:

1. I see no need for such a confusing duration. Just make it 1 min/level instead of 10 minutes, or 1 round/level or whatever. Certainly, don't base it on "class level". Use caster level if anything.

2. Get rid of the focus or specify that it need not be in hand, just on your person (and then make it whatever value you wish).

3. I catch your idea about aiding an ally with the grapple, but your previous wording was wrong. When I read "grapple creature" I assumed it was the one you were shooting, not other ones. Instead, may I suggest something like: "If the target takes damage from the attack, it suffers a -4 penalty on its next opposed grapple check or attack roll while being grappled. This penalty is not cumulative with itself for subsequent attacks." Merely adding this in to your latest version is fine, or with the swift version (and 1R/L).

4. I have a personal distaste for Swift actions, so take my comments with a huge grain of salt.

 

[FCWesel]

1. I see no need for such a confusing duration. Just make it 1 min/level instead of 10 minutes, or 1 round/level or whatever. Certainly, don't base it on "class level". Use caster level if anything.

It's hardly confusing at all. There's a reason it is the way it is. 1/min per level is WAY too long. Allowing a ten minute "option time" let's the PC take a shot or not, without losing the spell's effect entirely. So if one round the PC wants to drink a potion they can, but still have all the enspelled attacks possible to them. If they don't use the spell within that ten minutes however, the spell ends.

In this case Caster Level was what was meant, just used the "lesser" word for it, is all.

 

[Infiniti2000]

It's hardly confusing at all.

Then why not just use the precedent set by such spells as call lightning? Make the duration 1 min/level and every attack subtracts 1 min from the duration.

Why does having a high wisdom suddenly mean something to the wizard and this spell? I don't understand the connection. Would you have created that nonstandard duration if Verus Horne had a wisdom of 9?