Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cheiromancer" data-source="post: 2467845" data-attributes="member: 141">Normally not a good idea to post when you're tired; you make silly mistakes. But you don't have to be sleepy to do that- I just realized that my earlier rewrite ignored the fact that the spell targets only corporeal creatures.  The reference to spirits making up an undead's body refers to incorporeal undead- it should be stricken.  Omit the indicated words:Since the spell can affect constructs, you should amend this sentence:Also you shouldn't change the subject from singular to plural (although I have a sneaky suspicion I am the author of that stylistic faux pas.  Anyway, it still shouldn't be written like that). Simply say "...in the case of a living creature it dies, and otherwise is destroyed."  Destroyed covers undead and constructs both.  Actually, you can just say "dies or is destroyed" instead of "perishes" and drop the rest of the sentence.Again, a matter of style concerns me with the sentence that ends with "... the characters soul is slung in a hostile realm that threatens to destroy the target’s soul."  I would suggest rewriting it thus: "the character's soul is slung into a hostile realm that threatens to destroy it."  I don't care for the word "slung" (I prefer "flung") but I'll leave that up to you. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />In an earlier version I wanted to make it clear that a creature whose body died could be raised normally.  The sentence I wrote expressing this notion has since mutated into the following:Now, I can't think of any reason why someone might think there would be an additional ability penalty.  The description says that the Wisdom check is repeated until the soul returns to its body.  Once the soul actually returns, it is clear that you make no more checks.  Since the abilty penalty only worsens on a failed check, it is clear that there will be no additional ability penalty.  Saying something that goes without saying is likely to make people think that they missed some detail that made the utterance necessary.  So the line should be removed.The first round save (Fort save or take 3d6 and be nauseated for 1 round) could be a standard Fort save.  It makes it more likely that the target will lose an action.  (Nauseated creatures can only take a move equivalent action per round.)  I think you could and should change it.But as for the other saves... really, I think the spell is balanced around bypassing SR, deathward, and standard immunities.  I don't really see it as doing much more than taking someone out of the fight for a few rounds.  If the initial Will save fails, the target of the spell is likely going to be coup de graced- or at least sneak attacked or power attacked for massive damage.  And a DC 15 wisdom check... what would that correspond to as a Will save?  Let's take a high wisdom character.   Hmm.  Suppose we have a 20th level cleric, 28 Wisdom, two prestige classes with good will saves, +4 bonus to saves from items.  Nothing exceptional as far as 20th level clerics go.  +9 wisdom modifier, so 75% likely to make a DC 15 wisdom check.  But the guy's Will save is +29.  He's 75% likely to make a DC 35 Will save. Now what is the save DC of a 9th level spell going to be?  Assume the caster also has a 28 ability score, and give him Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus.  That's a DC of 30.  The cleric has a much better chance of making the save DC than making the Wisdom check DC.Maybe this is a bad example- the cleric has to have rolled a 1 on the initial save vs disjoin soul.  But I think you'll find that a DC 15 wisdom check is not as easy as it looks.  And the point of those saves is not the ability damage or the chance of dying; it is the time spent helpless in combat.  Suppose the cleric was a sorcerer lich instead.  Wisdom is high for a sorcerer- 15, say, and the other bits are the same (two prestige classes, +4 saves from items, etc.).  +22 to Will saves, so he must have rolled a 7 or less on the save (he has a 65% chance of success vs a DC 30 will save).  He has to roll a 13 or better on the Wisdom check... that's only a 40% chance of success.  So the spell is deadlier if it is a Wisdom check (tip: use  a limited wish to worsen the lich's chances for the first round or two.  Then the Wisdom penalty will have a chance to accumulate, and the lich's soul will probably be destroyed.)OK.  Just opened up the MMII at random.  Suppose the party is fighting a Corpse Tearer (p.141), a kind of dragon.  A CR of 28 makes it a tough challenge for a 20th level party.  It has  SR 39... but the caster doesn't worry about SR.  Touch AC is a measely 5.  No problem hitting (though you have to be uncomfortably close to the beast- lucky it has a -1 initiative).  Will save of +21.  60% chance of making the initial Will Save. If successful, it has a 75% chance of making the Fort save after. Not good odds for the spellcaster, just a little better than even for getting something out of the spell, but suppose the Will save is failed.  The Corpse Tearer has a 20 wisdom, so needs a 10 or better on its wisdom checks.  That's a 55% chance of success- less than if it was a Will Save!I guess I'm saying that replacing the DC 15 Wisdom check with a Will save will usually make the spell weaker, not stronger.  At epic levels I would expect saving throws to increase considerably faster than Wisdom scores, and probably faster than spell DCs do.  At epic levels, then, it is probably best to keep it a flat DC, but trust that the spell will only work for a round or two at best.  All you really need is enough time to coup de grace the subject of the spell.And the examples given show that it is not too unlikely that the spell will essentially take out a CR 22 lich or a CR 28 dragon.  I think that safely puts it in the range of a 9th level spell.Is it too powerful?I don't think so.  A caster could use assay resistance and a heightened Hold Monster to perform the same trick with the Corpse Tearer; the odds aren't quite as good (since there is still a chance SR will apply, even if the wizard has the spell penetration feat), but it can also be done at range.  And if unsuccesful the assay resistance lasts for 1 round/level, allowing other save or die spells to be cast.  So against the Corpse Tearer the spell sounds about right; it isn't much more effective than a fairly obvious (and underpowered- who uses Heighten spell?) combo.Neutralizing a lich's phylactery?  That's a tough one.  But note that it takes some extra work to do, since the Wisdom checks are likely to succeed (although if it was a Wisdom 10 sorcerer lich...).  Not only does the lich have to be in touch range, and have to fail its initial save, but it has to fail a few wisdom checks too. A few Limited wishes would be needed.  Now granted that limited wish has a trivial xp cost, but still, that's several spells that are needed.  So I'd think it is also in the 9th level spell range.  But not absurdly overpowered.So, to make a long story short, I'd say to make a few mechanical and stylistic changes but leave the spell basically as it is.  It is a nice 9th level spell.  It has limitations, but considerable strengths as well.[edit]You're pretty clever yourself.  I wouldn't have spent this amount of time and energy tinkering with the spell if you hadn't encouraged me.  Thanks. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> [/edit]</blockquote>

Verification