Epic Magic Big Thread

[Cheiromancer]

How about if we abstract the whole thing a little more? Say that the bonus to a ritual spell involving followers and cohorts is equal to the leadership score.

For number and level of followers, say that when a character takes the leadership feat to form a cabal, use the normal leadership numbers but the levels of all followers are reduced by 3. Effectively I'm following that rule about exceptional followers. For each leadership score calculate the total levels of the followers. If some of the followers are missing, use the line that corresponds to that reduced number of total levels instead of the leader's leadership.

For instance, a wizard with a leadership 27 score has 39 levels of followers. If two of the 1st level followers are missing he has to use the leadership 26 line instead, and gets a +26 bonus.

A character with leadership 25 will have 4 x 1st-level; 2 x 2nd-level; 2 x 3rd-level ; 1 x 4th-level followers and one 17th-level cohort in his cabal. He'd get a +25 bonus from a ritual where all his followers/cohorts (35 levels total) participate. He needs to be at least 24th level since he'll need Ritual Adept to handle 10 people. Leaving out the 1st and 2nd level followers he can function on the leadership 24 line instead (27 levels of followers).

Maybe the followers don't all need to be spellcasters, either. When the pope says Mass at St. Peter's there are oodles of lay people present. Not just as spectators, either; acolytes, altar servers, lectors, thurifers, etc.. They would need to be well-trained in their roles, though- a lot of rehearsal would be needed before a cabal would actually engage in a ritual. Now admittedly the pope doesn't bind Archdevils during Sunday mass at St. Peter's, but you get the idea.

(The motivation behind this is to allow PCs who aren't spellcasters to get involved in an epic ritual. And also to have a cabal who don't have too much independent magical power. Not all the cultists at a magical ritual will be able to cast magic missile at you when you come barging in and disrupt it.)

It's the leader's ability to make his followers work as an extension of his will that makes the leadership feat appropriate. You can't just round up a random collection of NPCs and expect them to perform as well.

How about making the case of a leader with followers the paradigm case? Such a character would have his leadership indicated, and the total hit dice in his cabal. He can lead a ritual with people who are not his followers (e.g. with PCs), but this is less effective. Only characters of level 6 or higher count, and they halve their levels when figuring out how their total hit dice compares to the cabal score, and the consequent bonus.

For example, suppose a 21st level wizard has the leadership feat, but his cohort is dead and his followers scattered. His leadership score is 25, the maximum allowed by the feat. He enlists the other party members to cast a ritual spell; 21 halved is 10. If there are 4 other PCs they can fill in for the 35 total levels of the cabal, and the caster can get his full bonus. 4 characters is all his 24 ranks in spellcraft allow him to coordinate, so that's about right.

A 40th level sorcerer with a leadership of 60. 75 1st; 38 2nd; 19 3rd; 10 4th; 5 5th; 3 6th; 2 7th; 1 8th level follower and a 35th level cohort. That's 348 levels total. If he doesn't have his cabal present he could round up 696 levels of characters instead (all of at least 6th level). But even with the ritual adept feat he can only coordinate 16 other characters. He probably won't be able to get the full +60 bonus unless a fair chunk of his cabal is present. +60 sounds like a lot, but there will be more than 150 people involved; it should be a lot.

What about a character without the leadership feat? Can he lead a ritual? I'd say that his level counts for half in determining his effective leadership score, and thus the maximum bonus he could get.

You can tinker with this. Maybe at least half the participants have to be spellcasters. [edit]The hit dice from cohorts have to be spellcasters.[/edit] They each expend one of their highest level spell slots. If this is not an epic spell slot then their hit dice only counts as twice the spell level of the slot (and may be further reduced if not a cohort). (A 25th level wizard contributing an 8th level slot counts only as a 16 level participant.) Non-spellcasters can participate, but they are fatigued from the effort (for a few minutes at least). Characters with the Cooperative Spell feat count as cohorts for the purpose of joining a cabal. Or whatever.

Anyway, that's my take on things.

[sblock=Leadership, total levels in cabal, number of members in the cabal]
2 1 1
3 2 1
4 3 1
5 3 1
6 4 1
7 5 1
8 5 1
9 6 1
10 7 1
11 7 1
12 8 1
13 9 1
14 10 1
15 10 1
16 11 1
17 13 2
18 13 2
19 16 3
20 18 4
21 22 5
22 24 6
23 26 7
24 27 7
25 35 10
26 36 10
27 39 12
28 41 13
29 44 15
30 46 16
31 61 21
32 63 22
33 67 25
34 74 28
35 78 31
36 101 38
37 105 41
38 113 45
39 117 48
40 129 53
41 134 57
42 142 61
43 174 71
44 179 74
45 187 79
46 192 82
47 206 89
48 214 93
49 219 97
50 236 103
51 246 109
52 251 112
53 263 118
54 268 121
55 278 127
56 316 136
57 321 140
58 329 144
59 343 151
60 348 154
61 356 159
62 361 162
63 380 170
64 388 174
65 393 178
66 405 183
67 415 189
68 420 192
69 443 200
70 448 203
71 458 209
72 470 214
73 475 218
74 483 222
75 502 230[/SBLOCK]

So looking at this chart you could see that a character with a leadership of 65 leads a cabal with 393 levels (total) and 178 individuals. If for some reason only 300 levels worth of followers were available, the maximum bonus would be +55 (the first line with less than 300 total levels). And so on.

[edit]
The payoff is very nearly linear at lower levels, and pretty close to how it should be. A wizard with a leadership of 20 gets two companions to contribute 9th level spells in an impromptu cabal. Their levels count as 18 (as twice the spell level) and see they aren't cohorts/followers the value is halved. Still, between them that's enough to provide 18 levels, and so the wizard gets the +20 ritual bonus. If there were only one such companion then he'd still get a +13 bonus. Too good? Maybe, but I don't think it will break anything.

And it is pretty hard to get those high bonuses; a lot of people have to gather in one spot.

 

[The Forsaken One]

Lurking in again.

1) Ditch the Ritual Adept feat and let rituals only be achieved by characters with the Cabal Master feat.

2) Have some kind of 'ritual inefficiency' - the bigger the cabal, the more inefficient it becomes.

Option 2 if obviously the more attractive one because its "cool" and other kind of things but might be better left played out in RP. I'd stick with option 1 for the sake of easy to handleness (which obviously isnt a real word ). Also it gives you a proper reason to blow one of your precious epic feats on it.

Say 1/4 the total number of levels contributed act as a mitigating factor – i.e. 10 x epic casters will provide a –25 mitigating factor. The 50th-level Cabal Master would therefore gain a –79 mitigating factor (which still seems kind of high) – he could also enlist 20 x epic-level casters (he has the Ritual Adept feat as well) and augment his cabal for a further –50. Is –129 too way out there? We're talking one big mother of a ritual here.

Level 50 IS pretty hefty in itself and hardly comprehendable in the scope of power which is wielded then. It sounds perfectly fine with me.

On a more practical note, where the hell are you going to recruit 20 willing or compelled transvalent casters from for your ritual? The ingame effort needed to procure that would seem a proper enough obstacle to take to warrant such a bonus.

And dont forget the more participants the easier things can go wrong and the bigger the chance of a traitor in their midst...

I know im not helping mechanics wise but just giving a small voice to the fact that as you very well know yourself from your campaigns that at this level you gotta trust in your players more then a bit and you can't make rules or situations 100% airtight at this level of power and complexity.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

How about if we abstract the whole thing a little more? Say that the bonus to a ritual spell involving followers and cohorts is equal to the leadership score.

Sheer elegance! Thank-you, Cheiromancer. Sometimes I can't see the wood for the trees...

Maybe the followers don't all need to be spellcasters, either. When the pope says Mass at St. Peter's there are oodles of lay people present. Not just as spectators, either; acolytes, altar servers, lectors, thurifers, etc.. They would need to be well-trained in their roles, though- a lot of rehearsal would be needed before a cabal would actually engage in a ritual.

The Epic Leadership feat also grants a lot of NPC-classed followers of level 1-3. Experts with ranks in Knowledge (religion or arcana) or Spellcraft might fit the bill. I like the idea of extending the ritual to include nonspellcasting classes.

Now admittedly the pope doesn't bind Archdevils during Sunday mass at St. Peter's...

Maybe he can't get a high enough mitigating factor . What was your job again? Sorry, but that quote is so sigworthy. I'll resist the temptation, though.

The motivation behind this is to allow PCs who aren't spellcasters to get involved in an epic ritual.

This, I'm not so sure about. Given the training and preparation involved, it might seem a bit odd if the caster asks Thrud the Barbarian: "Okay, Thrud. You stand here, and wave this censer. When you see me nod, start chanting these words..." I'm thinking that an (arbitrary) 1-week prep might be in order, as the participants familiarize themselves with the ritual proceedings. Obviously, once they have their role memorized, they could perform the ritual again with less (or maybe no) rehearsal.

What about a character without the leadership feat? Can he lead a ritual? I'd say that his level counts for half in determining his effective leadership score, and thus the maximum bonus he could get.

Sounds good, although I think I wouldn't allow Leadership bonuses (including Cha bonus) to factor into this.

And it is pretty hard to get those high bonuses; a lot of people have to gather in one spot

.

Exactly. I think rituals are best for large, one-off effects. Hence, a little more latitude is appropriate in the mitigating factor.

I'll draft a revised system and see how it looks - it may be a few days, though. Need to spend some time with the family.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

On a more practical note, where the hell are you going to recruit 20 willing or compelled transvalent casters from for your ritual? The ingame effort needed to procure that would seem a proper enough obstacle to take to warrant such a bonus.

Demographics will obviously play a big role in this. I've given it some thought, but bear in mind that by the time a character reaches 21+ levels, he's got usually got more than one world that he can look to.

I've barred magically compelled and summoned creatures, as well as simulacra. I think free will is a must, to prevent abuse by canny players.

And dont forget the more participants the easier things can go wrong and the bigger the chance of a traitor in their midst...

This is a good point - a mole, disrupting the spell from the inside might be catastrophic.

you gotta trust in your players more than a bit and you can't make rules or situations 100% airtight at this level of power and complexity.

Too true. And it's good to be reminded of that. Still, we have to try.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Revising Mitigating Factors

Here's what I'm thinking at the moment.

10,000 gp power component: -1 (max -10)
Backlash: wondering if negative levels might be more appropriate than Con drain. Again.
XP burn: upping to 500XP per -1
Extending Casting Time: 1 round = -2; 1 minute = -4; 10 minutes = -5; 1 hr = -8; 1 day = -10; 1 week = -20; 1 month = -30.
Artifact Focus: Still a flat -10. I like the idea of a suite of spells designed with an artifact in mind.
Ritual Spell: Make them difficult to organize (prep). 1/4 sum of spell levels. Cabal Leader uses Leadership progression instead.

Notice how none of these bear any resemblance to Cheiromancer's initial guesstimates for mitigating factors

Seriously, though, I'm satisfied with a higher XP burn + power component cost. Other things that Cheiromancer has bullied me into considering:

1) Adjusting the SP for spells based on the casting time and components of the root spell. Actually, I've decided that I want a dedicated awaken seed and the usual 24-hour casting time won't fly for an SP 14 seed. My sense of consistency means that I need to do them all now.

2) Harrow and heal, if replicable with a limited wish (via the adept spell list, grr!) translate to a 2000XP cost for an arcane caster at the same SP if 1000XP = 2SP =2 spell levels. Ignoring the usual 250XP for limited wish here, but I'd like a mandatory XP penalty for arcane use of these seeds.

3) Life becomes SP 24 (10 min casting time and 10,000 gp cost of resurrection). At the same SP, arcane caster needs to pay 4000XP here (wish at +2 spell levels but 1 action and no components). True resurrection at +6 SP (components, rounded up + level).

Awaken would be an SP 24 seed; which I'm still mulling over. Thing is, a wizard can cast awaken via a limited wish in one action whilst it takes a druid a whole bloody day. Some kind of fudge may be necessary here.

I think it might also be helpful to define a name for this system. The one in the epic level handbook is the ELH- this one is...?

Jacobean Double.

 

[Cheiromancer]

The nice thing with 250 xp = -1 is that it works better with things like awaken and limited wish. And 5000 gp fits nicely into calculating the mitigating factor for spells like true resurrection. With 500 xp and 10 000 xp you are talking half factors.

Regarding the ability of limited wish to duplicate spells: If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then I'd check the cleric, druid, bard, paladin and ranger lists, in that order (cf. MM 315 "Special Abilities").

In other words, heal is a 6th level spell, not a 5th level spell. That's how I would rule it anyway. The existence of some bizarre little prestige class somewhere shouldn't affect how limited wish works, even if its spell list is weird.

Regarding wish: As written, a wish can duplicate up to 8th level wizard spells or 6th level cleric spells. I think that any "clerical surcharge" should be based on this gap of 2 spell levels (4 USP). I think 1000 xp is sufficient. The other 4000 xp is based on the extreme flexibility of the wish spell; if it were an epic spell it would have a high USP because of its flexibility factors.

The fact that a wish can duplicate a 7th level clerical spell is odd. Especially when resurrection has a long casting time and an expensive material component. It is almost as if resurrection is duplicating a function of the wish spell rather than vice versa. In fact, if you treat resurrection as an arcane USP 22 effect, with 10,000 gp = -2 and 10 minutes = -6 (as per an earlier version) and a +4 surcharge (arcane=>divine), then it fits perfectly.

This approach doesn't quite work for the awaken/limited wish pairing. The casting time is just too long for awaken. Needs more thought; no way a 7th level arcane spell with an xp cost (USP 19) should be able to duplicate a 5th level druid spell (USP 15 + casting time modifier). Adjusting the costs of seeds won't fix this anomaly; I would think about this more before you do it. If you do recalculate the seeds, I'd recommend using a spreadsheet formula so you can fiddle with gp/xp costs at will. And list casting time.

BTW, I like calling this system Jacobean - that way I can pretend the credit is partially mine. "Jacobean Double" is too long, but JII is good.

[sblock=to lurkers]Jacobean is the adjectival form of Jim, which both Sepulchrave and I answer to.[/sblock]
I'd like your mitigating factors for time a lot more if there was some sort of numerical rule visible. I have a feeling that you are trying to make the USP for non-epic spells be capped by something- true resurrection at USP 30 or somthing.

Ritual Spell: Make them difficult to organize (prep). 1/4 sum of spell levels. Cabal Leader uses Leadership progression instead.

Ouch. How about the 1st assistant's bonus is the spell slot contributed, the second assistant's bonus is half the spell slot, the third assistant's bonus is one third the spell slot, and so on, up to the maximum number of assistants allowed by your spellcraft ranks. The rate of return diminishes at a great rate, but it is not so punitive up front.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

The nice thing with 250 xp = -1 is that it works better with things like awaken and limited wish. And 5000 gp fits nicely into calculating the mitigating factor for spells like true resurrection. With 500 xp and 10 000 xp you are talking half factors.

I know . But I really want to limit mitigating factors at this stage. The alternative is to reduce the cap on xp (say 250 xp/level): this is a logical progression from an inferred wish cap (5000xp at 20th level); or limit xp at a hard cap of 10,000/-40). If power components run at 5000gp/-1, a cap of 50,000gp/-10 is in order.

Regarding the ability of limited wish to duplicate spells: If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then I'd check the cleric, druid, bard, paladin and ranger lists, in that order (cf. MM 315 "Special Abilities").

Ooh, good find. Some kind of precedent is always nice. That said, if you treat it as a 5th level spell and factor in the difference at 250xp/-1, then the arcane cost becomes 1250xp, which seems okay. I don't know that applying a flexibility rationale to wish is useful - it would be extreme.

The fact that a wish can duplicate a 7th level clerical spell is odd. Especially when resurrection has a long casting time and an expensive material component. It is almost as if resurrection is duplicating a function of the wish spell rather than vice versa. In fact, if you treat resurrection as an arcane USP 22 effect, with 10,000 gp = -2 and 10 minutes = -6 (as per an earlier version) and a +4 surcharge (arcane=>divine), then it fits perfectly.

An arcane resurrection has an SP of 42 (at 250xp/SP) vs a divine resurrection with an SP of 26 (at 5000gp/-1 and 10 mins = -6). To bring the SP down to 26 for a wizard would still require 4000xp. True res then goes to +7 (at +2 levels and +15k). A 23rd level cleric could cast resurrection as a 1-action spell with no mitigation; a 30th-level cleric a 1-action true resurrection with no mitigation, which seems okay.

This approach doesn't quite work for the awaken/limited wish pairing. The casting time is just too long for awaken. Needs more thought; no way a 7th level arcane spell with an xp cost (USP 19) should be able to duplicate a 5th level druid spell (USP 15 + casting time modifier).

It sucks. I think the awaken seed should be SP24 (lvl + casting time), and should include a provision of 250xp/awakened creature - this xp cannot be mitigated. Mass awaken costs the caster 250xp/creature. Basing an arcane version off of wish (SP 32) and then reimbursing the differerence would make it an SP24 spell with a 3000xp arcane surcharge, which seems way over-the-top. I'm inclined to simply treat it as a sor/wiz 5 spell for all purposes, and drop the arcane surcharge: the ELH system required the caster to have 24 ranks in Knowledge (nature), and that might be worth retaining. I'm reluctant to reintroduce it into the mix, though.

Btw, Awaken construct is sor/wiz 9 and costs 5k xp: I'm not sure how this spell works. Are the targets treated as sentient animated objects with the construct type, or what? Can an awakened colossal statue take levels in barbarian? Is it some kind of Eberron thing?

BTW, I like calling this system Jacobean - that way I can pretend the credit is partially mine.

That was my intention, and I see no pretense.

 

[Cheiromancer]

I like the -1/level approach to xp mitigation. It does fit wish quite nicely. And people shouldn't be blowing more than 1/4 of an experience level on one spell anyway. My earlier guesstimates failed to account for the fact that epic spells would be used more than once a level.

Wealth increases so fast with level, though, that a hard cap of 50,000 gp seems kinda low. I mean, it's less than 5% than what a 36th level character earns getting to 37th level. At that level they should be seriously considering spending five or ten times that amount for a significant magic effect. How about taking a page out of costing magic items, and make it bonus squared x 1000? Perhaps to a maximum of 1 per 2 levels. 100 000 gp for a -10 mitigating factor at 21st level. 400 000 for a -20 at 40th level. It's a reasonable way to get a -5 or something, but awfully hard to abuse.

And I am not at all sure that wish should be the model spell for determining the life seed. Or any seed, for that matter. It has too many 9th level equivalent effects that are independent of its ability to replicate effects. (The undo misfortune function, or the transport travelers function, or the +1 inherent ability bonus.) I think it would make more sense to use limited wish as the basis for arcane/divine conversions instead.

The entire function of limited wish seems to be to replicate other spells (including interpolations and extrapolations of existing spells). The only non-duplication function that is mentioned in its description is the ability to undo harmful effects spell. But even there it seems to be duplicating a break enchantment or a restoration or something. Significantly, it can be used to duplicate raise dead at a fairly insignificant cost: 300 xp is only 2.3% of the xp needed to advance to 14th level.

Raise dead in contrast is a pretty expensive spell. At 9th level the 5000 gp component cost is 38% of the wealth expected to be earned leveling up to 10th level. Resurrection and true resurrection, in contrast, both cost only 25% of one's level-up wealth. At a conversion rate of 16 gp per xp point, I could see a cash-starved sorcerer accepting commissions to raise the dead, pocketing the 5,000 gp normally used to purchase diamond dust. That's a better rate than you get making magic items, (even if you sell them at full market price) and you don't need an item creation feat to do it.

Anyway, it is interesting that limited wish can duplicate a raise dead for only 300 xp. If you scaled limited wish up two levels, but didn't add any of the extra functions that wish has, you'd expect it to be able to duplicate a resurrection for maybe 500 xp.

In other words, an arcane life seed is arguably USP 24. Or 22 with a 500 xp component per target. Or something like that; I could even see an argument for 24 with a 250 xp per target. Why don't you fold awaken and life into the same seed?

I imagine an awakened construct can do anything an awakened tree can. After all, an awakened tree is defined as a construct (with the plant type) with an intelligence score. I think the plant type overrides the construct type, but I'm not sure of that.

That was my intention, and I see no pretense.

You are very gracious, and I am honored.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Basing life off of raise dead is another possibility. It has 1 min casting time (+4) and a 5000gp component (+1): SP19. An arcane version based off of limited wish defrays the casting time exactly, and would cost 300xp plus 250xp - call it 500xp (for some reason, I've been pegging limited wish at 250xp throughout anyway).

It may seem slightly absurd to extrapolate factors for resurrection and true resurrection from this, though as the 20 days -> 200 years discrepancy is enormous. Ah, bollocks.

Honestly, I just think we're trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. My feeling at present:

Heal and Harrow (Harm): SP 16. Arcane caster pays mandatory 500 xp.
Life: SP 26 (resurrection) and SP 33 (true resurrection). Arcane caster pays mandatory 1000 XP.
Awaken: SP 24. Additional cost of 250xp/creature awakened. No arcane penalty.

An admittance that the arcane surcharges are symbolic of the fact that wizards and sorcerers are less adept at manipulating these energies than divine casters: I think this concession is important, as it's a sacred cow. Folding awaken back into life is a possibility, although if we do it will be the only seed whose lowest SP root (awaken) isn't reflected in the seed school (Conjuration).

There again, awaken is the perfect candidate for Magnificat - whatever the hell that revised feat looks like.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Backlash: wondering if negative levels might be more appropriate than Con drain. Again.

Negative levels make you lose your highest level doesn't it? I wonder if that means epic spell slots, or if is just the valent ones. If you lose spells, then there is some kind of self-ritualing going on.

Maybe the backlash could be of a random type. A chance either of penalties to all d20 rolls (~negative levels) or 2d6 points of damage per level, or ability damage (to a random physical stat, or maybe to any stat, including their casting stat). Or one of more magic items has to save or be burned out by the backlash. Or one or more prepared spells is lost. Or a number (equal to the mitigating factor) of spell levels of hostile magical effects is generated by the DM; same DC as the epic spell. Or something. Numerically these penalties wouldn't have to be as severe as if they were a known quality (and therefore capable of being minimized by a canny player). The ability damage could be of a type that can be healed, say.

That would be kinda fun.

Extending Casting Time: 1 round = -2; 1 minute = -4; 10 minutes = -5; 1 hr = -8; 1 day = -10; 1 week = -20; 1 month = -30.

It would really look a lot better if 10 minutes were -6 instead of -5. If a "day" meant 8 hours this would work well enough as an exponential progression, moderated by a little by a linear progression at the multi-day stage.