The Forsaken One
Explorer
Yeah can see what you mean, thanks. But something is irking me about it, just cant put my finger on it.Cheiromancer said:
Epic Magic Big Thread
- Thread starter Sepulchrave II
- Start date
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
I wonder if our analysis is to the point. Should a 39th level wizard be able to kill 9 equal KR encounters per day on his own? If he could, wouldn't we think he was too powerful? So finding that's it difficult for the wizard to take down a young adult force dragon (even with several specialization feats) is actually a good thing.
But suppose the target was less than half 1/2 his KR? Well, that should be a different story. In particular, a wizard surprising a single target half his level should have an excellent chance of destroying it if he uses his best spell for the job. Destroy based spells are not the best for equal KR encounters, perhaps, but are very good for zapping single, weak monsters.
In the following chart I list monsters of various groupings, together with their Fortitude save and hit points. I've left out golems and swarms and other creatures who might be inconvenient for a wizard with a single-target spell. I think that a destroy based spell by a 26th level wizard can easily handle KR 12 threats. A 39th level wizard should be able to easily handle a KR 18 threat. A 52nd level wizard should be able to slay KR 24 targets pretty easily. Anyway, I would suggest these would be appropriate benchmarks for the destroy suite of spells.
It would seem that our 39th level wizard with a DC 42 spell should be able to slay 24 KR monsters quite easily. The Mu-Spore might give him trouble, and perhaps the Titan. He's doing lots of damage, so he can afford to raise the DC a bit. I am presuming a high powered headband, and both the Metannihilator and Herald of the Eschaton feats. Without that he would be doing only 1/4 the damage; 241 hp. Which is about enough for the 18 KR that he should be able to handle.
This looks all right to me. Does it look all right to you guys?
But suppose the target was less than half 1/2 his KR? Well, that should be a different story. In particular, a wizard surprising a single target half his level should have an excellent chance of destroying it if he uses his best spell for the job. Destroy based spells are not the best for equal KR encounters, perhaps, but are very good for zapping single, weak monsters.
In the following chart I list monsters of various groupings, together with their Fortitude save and hit points. I've left out golems and swarms and other creatures who might be inconvenient for a wizard with a single-target spell. I think that a destroy based spell by a 26th level wizard can easily handle KR 12 threats. A 39th level wizard should be able to easily handle a KR 18 threat. A 52nd level wizard should be able to slay KR 24 targets pretty easily. Anyway, I would suggest these would be appropriate benchmarks for the destroy suite of spells.
Code:
KR 12 Monsters - Fort save and hit points
Nightshade (Nightwing) +9 144 hp
Noble Salamander +12 112 hp
Young Gold Dragon +12 133 hp
12-headed Cry/pyro Hydra +13 129 hp
Elder Xorn +13 130 hp
Glabrezu +18 174 hp
Colossal Spider +20 208 hp
KR 18 monsters (CR 26-28) - Fort save and hit points
Nightshade (Nightcrawler) +12 212 hp
Planetar +14 133 hp
Black Dragon (Adult) +15 199 hp
Formian QUeen +19 190 hp
Marilith +19 216 hp
Behemoth gorilla +24 376 hp
KR 24-ish Monsters - Fort save and hit points
Anaxim (KR 26) +12 430 hp
Shadow of the Void (KR 22) +13 227 hp
Shape of Fire (KR 22) +13 227 hp
Winterwight (KR 24) +14 208 hp
Neh-Thalggu (KR 26) +16 336 hp
Gloom (KR 24) +17 337 hp
Pit fiend (KR 21) +19 225 hp
Green Dragon (old) (KR 24) +21 325 hp
Thorciasid (KR 21) +21 478 hp
Balor (KR 22) +22 290 hp
Chichimec (KR 25) +22 435 hp
Titan (KR 20) +26 370 hp
Mu-Spore (KR 25) +28 562 hpIt would seem that our 39th level wizard with a DC 42 spell should be able to slay 24 KR monsters quite easily. The Mu-Spore might give him trouble, and perhaps the Titan. He's doing lots of damage, so he can afford to raise the DC a bit. I am presuming a high powered headband, and both the Metannihilator and Herald of the Eschaton feats. Without that he would be doing only 1/4 the damage; 241 hp. Which is about enough for the 18 KR that he should be able to handle.
This looks all right to me. Does it look all right to you guys?
Last edited:
Sepulchrave II
Legend
No, he shouldn't - I started to post something along these lines last night but got distracted by compiling a list of saving throws by CR.
A KR 39 challenge should use up 25% of the resources of a 39th level party of 4.
I would write more, but I need to sleep. I think we should move on from destroy, though.
One question, before I lapse into a coma, htough: what implicit level of min-maxing does the KR system assume?
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
Short-answer: about 50% more effective than a pretzels and beer character thrown together out of the PHB.
Long answer: Upper_Krust based his design on the principle 1 level = +1 CR. But right off the bat PCs got a bonus for having good ability scores (IIRC a 32 point-buy is +1 CR). WotC challenge ratings are usually too low; they are based on the idea that a small increase in CR (+2) should double the challenge difficulty. Which doesn't really work. But the attempt to make it work "squashes" CRs together. To convert from UK's system you multiply by 2/3; this makes a similar degree of squashing take place.
Strictly speaking you should squash the PC's numbers as well, but practically that doesn't seem to be necessary. Whether it is a lenient DM, min-maxed PCs, or what, PCs are fighting a bit above their weight. I suspect that a standard encounter (25% of resources) is really a bit heavier; maybe up to 50%, though this might be expressed mostly in their best spells or whatever. If the PCs want to rest after one encounter, then it could be that they are being pushed a little. If you don't let them rest and they get TPKed in the second encounter, then they definitely are being pushed.
I never really studied the issue systematically when I was DMing. And certainly not at high levels- my games were mostly in the 6-8 level spread. I bet that a KR 39 encounter should not be one KR 39 monster, though. A spread of monsters, arriving in waves, with terrain a factor, etc.. One monster often means that it comes down to who wins initiative.
I suppose that I shouldn't regard player death at these levels as being a sign that things have gone badly wrong. Ignore Material Components can make the cost of a true resurrection irrelevant, and wishes can undo unfortunate turns of events. And this is just what henchmen and cohorts can do!
But yeah, insofar as a Challenge Rating system can work at all, this one seems to be based on a certain amount of min-maxing. If this isn't going on, you should multiply the PC levels by 2/3 to compute their KR. That will probably be too low, but sometimes it is better safe than sorry.
[edit]
Sounds good. What do you want to tackle next? I still feel the need for benchmarks- especially for unmitigated spells. I think figuring out mitigating factors will be easier if we have an idea about the USP of various benchmark spells.
Long answer: Upper_Krust based his design on the principle 1 level = +1 CR. But right off the bat PCs got a bonus for having good ability scores (IIRC a 32 point-buy is +1 CR). WotC challenge ratings are usually too low; they are based on the idea that a small increase in CR (+2) should double the challenge difficulty. Which doesn't really work. But the attempt to make it work "squashes" CRs together. To convert from UK's system you multiply by 2/3; this makes a similar degree of squashing take place.
Strictly speaking you should squash the PC's numbers as well, but practically that doesn't seem to be necessary. Whether it is a lenient DM, min-maxed PCs, or what, PCs are fighting a bit above their weight. I suspect that a standard encounter (25% of resources) is really a bit heavier; maybe up to 50%, though this might be expressed mostly in their best spells or whatever. If the PCs want to rest after one encounter, then it could be that they are being pushed a little. If you don't let them rest and they get TPKed in the second encounter, then they definitely are being pushed.
I never really studied the issue systematically when I was DMing. And certainly not at high levels- my games were mostly in the 6-8 level spread. I bet that a KR 39 encounter should not be one KR 39 monster, though. A spread of monsters, arriving in waves, with terrain a factor, etc.. One monster often means that it comes down to who wins initiative.
I suppose that I shouldn't regard player death at these levels as being a sign that things have gone badly wrong. Ignore Material Components can make the cost of a true resurrection irrelevant, and wishes can undo unfortunate turns of events. And this is just what henchmen and cohorts can do!
But yeah, insofar as a Challenge Rating system can work at all, this one seems to be based on a certain amount of min-maxing. If this isn't going on, you should multiply the PC levels by 2/3 to compute their KR. That will probably be too low, but sometimes it is better safe than sorry.
[edit]
Sepulchrave II said:
Sounds good. What do you want to tackle next? I still feel the need for benchmarks- especially for unmitigated spells. I think figuring out mitigating factors will be easier if we have an idea about the USP of various benchmark spells.
Last edited:
The Forsaken One
Explorer
Thats exactly on the point what Wizards should be good at in my opinion.
Fieari
Explorer
How about the Call seed? There always is the difficulty of dealing with things based on HD, as we all know that the HD to CR/KR ratio can vary wildly from creature to creature. And what about templates? Esspecially since there are a largish number of VERY nasty templates that don't add anything to HD at all... the templates might (MIGHT! sometimes it won't even do this...) make the creature unique and qualify for the spellcraft requirement hike (am I correct in assuming USP stands for Unmitigated Spellcraft Prerequisite?)... but even then, it'd just be a matter of finding enough templates that don't increase HD to make it worth it.
I'm picturing here binding a Paragon Atata Balor, for instance. HD unchanged... its battle effectiveness though? Through the roof. And those aren't the ONLY templates that don't alter HD.
I'm picturing here binding a Paragon Atata Balor, for instance. HD unchanged... its battle effectiveness though? Through the roof. And those aren't the ONLY templates that don't alter HD.
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
Fieari said:
In the Tales of Wyre story hour Sepulchrave posted
Sepulchrave II said:
Similar remarks would apply to the Call seed.
[edit]
The justification for this is that when you advance an outsider, each +2 HD adds +1 CR. So anything that adds +1 CR is equivalent to adding +2 HD.
Last edited:
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
Thoughts about backlash
I was thinking that a good context for backlash would be when a caster has to improvise some aspect of a spell in an emergency situation. He's grappled, and has to cast the spell without somatic components, or in a magical silence and has to cast it without verbal components. Or the spell has a range of 75-ft. and he really wants to bespell an opponent 100 ft. away. Things like that; stuff that's kind of peripheral to the spell, not used to balance the spell, but which is sometimes important. And factors that could conceivably be added by sheer, desperate will.
Here's the factors that to me seem like good candidates to be mitigated by backlash:
An ad hoc modification would cost 2d6 damage per SP. If the spell was designed with a backlash factor in mind it would only cost 1d6 per SP. The total mitigation by backlash can't be more than 1 SP/level.
I had a question about the "overcome specific resistance or immunity" factor. Do you need a different factor to overcome a [Fire] creature's immunity to fire than a devil's immunity to fire? How about a golem's immunity to magic? I was thinking of adding in this as a factor you could spontaneously add via backlash, but it seems like the kind of thing that would require careful research, not just increased effort.
What do you think about adding the "increase saving throw DC" factor? I'm inclined to think it is part of how a spell is balanced when being designed, and so you wouldn't be able to add it on at the end. But it seems an awful lot like overcoming spell resistance or an opposing caster level check. I'm not sure.
I was thinking that a good context for backlash would be when a caster has to improvise some aspect of a spell in an emergency situation. He's grappled, and has to cast the spell without somatic components, or in a magical silence and has to cast it without verbal components. Or the spell has a range of 75-ft. and he really wants to bespell an opponent 100 ft. away. Things like that; stuff that's kind of peripheral to the spell, not used to balance the spell, but which is sometimes important. And factors that could conceivably be added by sheer, desperate will.
Here's the factors that to me seem like good candidates to be mitigated by backlash:
Code:
[b]Spell Resistance and Caster Level[/b]
Gain +1 bonus on caster level check to overcome spell resistance +1
Gain +1 on caster level check to beat foe's dispel effect +1
Gain +1 bonus on opposed caster level check +1
[b]Casting Time[/b]
Quickened spell (limit 1 Quickened spell/round) +8
[b]Components[/b]
No verbal component +2
No somatic component +2
[b]Range[/b]
Change from personal to touch +4
Change range from touch to close (75 ft.) +8
Increase range by 100% +2An ad hoc modification would cost 2d6 damage per SP. If the spell was designed with a backlash factor in mind it would only cost 1d6 per SP. The total mitigation by backlash can't be more than 1 SP/level.
I had a question about the "overcome specific resistance or immunity" factor. Do you need a different factor to overcome a [Fire] creature's immunity to fire than a devil's immunity to fire? How about a golem's immunity to magic? I was thinking of adding in this as a factor you could spontaneously add via backlash, but it seems like the kind of thing that would require careful research, not just increased effort.
What do you think about adding the "increase saving throw DC" factor? I'm inclined to think it is part of how a spell is balanced when being designed, and so you wouldn't be able to add it on at the end. But it seems an awful lot like overcoming spell resistance or an opposing caster level check. I'm not sure.
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
I think it is a good idea to include a mitigating factor for reducing spell duration. I'd make it -4 per step of reduction, though, and allow a 1 round duration to be the step below 20 rounds. It reminds me of the mechanic for swift spells; cast as a swift action, but they only last 1 round.
[sblock=text of Reduce Duration Mitigating Factor]Duration
Each reduction in the duration category of an epic spell reduces the final Spellcraft Prerequisite by –4. Spell durations are calculated from spells with durations given in some number of hours per level, 10 minutes/level, 1 minute/level or 1 round/level. By applying the 'reduce duration by one category' mitigating factor:
Spells with a duration of special, concentration, permanent or instantaneous may not apply this factor.[/sblock]
I've revised my version of the fortify seed taking this factor into account. The base durations that were in minutes have been scaled up to 10s of minutes, but weakened by a factor of 4 SP. The base anibuff only does +8 (not +2), and spell resistance starts at 28 (not 32). I added a factor to buff several stats at once to replicate the belt of magnificence effect.
[sblock=text of Fortify Creature]Seed: Fortify Creature
Transmutation
Root Spell: Bull’s strength, barkskin, heroism, stoneskin, spell resistance, etc.
Spellcraft Prerequisite: 14+
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: 200 minutes
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
Spells using the fortify creature seed augment one or more of the target's faculties, either to enable it to withstand a particular kind of threat, or to lend it additional power or effectiveness in a certain area. Fortify creature is a versatile seed with many possible applications.
At a base Spellcraft Prerequisite of 14, the caster can choose to develop a spell which can do one of the following:
Fortify creature cannot be made permanent.[/sblock]
I think it might be worthwhile to increase the base duration of epic seeds when possible, scaling back the effects by 4 USP for 10-fold increases, or 8 USP for 100-fold increses. This might be easier than trying to manage dramatic increases in duration with the Extend factor, or exponential factors. If a 10-fold increase is appropriate, let it be in the base seed. If it isn't appropriate, let them pay through the nose for it.
Despite our revision of the base seed costs (to 4 + 2 x level) I'm still keeping my version of the Animate Dead seed at USP 20. I sort of think of it as a conflation of animate dead and an hour casting time (USP 14 + 6) together with create greater undead cast as a standard action (USP 20). But mostly I like it because the numbers scale so nicely; it is like having the energy seed do 10d6 at a cost of 10 USP, with each +1d6 costing +1 SP. (The dispel seed has a similar numerical elegance).
[sblock=text of Animate Dead]Seed: Animate Dead
Necromancy [Evil]
Root Spell: Animate dead, create undead, create greater undead
Spellcraft Prerequisite: 20+
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: One or more corpses touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
The caster can turn the bones or bodies of dead creatures into undead skeletons or zombies that follow his or her spoken commands, or alternatively create more powerful undead which he or she must control through some other means. A destroyed undead can’t be animated again.
At a base Spellcraft Prerequisite of 20, the caster can use the animate dead seed to create undead:
[sblock=text of Reduce Duration Mitigating Factor]Duration
Each reduction in the duration category of an epic spell reduces the final Spellcraft Prerequisite by –4. Spell durations are calculated from spells with durations given in some number of hours per level, 10 minutes/level, 1 minute/level or 1 round/level. By applying the 'reduce duration by one category' mitigating factor:
- A spell with a duration given in hours has its duration reduced to 200 minutes.
- A spell with a duration of 200 minutes has its duration reduced to 20 minutes.
- A spell with a duration of 20 minutes has its duration reduced to 20 rounds.
- A spell with a duration of 20 rounds has its duration reduced to 1 round.
Spells with a duration of special, concentration, permanent or instantaneous may not apply this factor.[/sblock]
I've revised my version of the fortify seed taking this factor into account. The base durations that were in minutes have been scaled up to 10s of minutes, but weakened by a factor of 4 SP. The base anibuff only does +8 (not +2), and spell resistance starts at 28 (not 32). I added a factor to buff several stats at once to replicate the belt of magnificence effect.
[sblock=text of Fortify Creature]Seed: Fortify Creature
Transmutation
Root Spell: Bull’s strength, barkskin, heroism, stoneskin, spell resistance, etc.
Spellcraft Prerequisite: 14+
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: 200 minutes
Saving Throw: Will negates (harmless)
Spell Resistance: Yes (harmless)
Spells using the fortify creature seed augment one or more of the target's faculties, either to enable it to withstand a particular kind of threat, or to lend it additional power or effectiveness in a certain area. Fortify creature is a versatile seed with many possible applications.
At a base Spellcraft Prerequisite of 14, the caster can choose to develop a spell which can do one of the following:
- The caster can choose to develop a spell which grants a +8 enhancement bonus to any ability score. The ability score to be enhanced must either be chosen during spell development, or the spell flexibility factor included in development to allow such an enhancement to be determined when the spell is cast.
Factor: For each additional +1 bonus, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +2.
Factor: To enhance either all physical ability scores or all mental ability scores increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +8. To enhance all six ability scores increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +12. - The fortify creature seed can also be used to grant 4 temporary hit points per hit dice of the target.
Factor: For each additional temporary hit point bestowed per target’s hit dice, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +4. - The fortify ability seed can grant spell resistance 28.
Factor: Each additional point of spell resistance increases the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +1. - The fortify ability seed can grant damage reduction 10/adamantine, preventing a total of 200 points of damage in this fashion before it is discharged.
Factors: For each additional point of damage reduction, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +1; for each additional 50 points which can be absorbed before the spell is discharged, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +2. To increase the damage reduction value to adamantine and epic, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +10. - Grant a +8 enhancement bonus to natural armor which stacks with existing natural armor, but not with other enhancement bonuses to natural armor.
Factor: For each additional +1 bonus, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +2. - Grant a +2 morale bonus to attack rolls, saving throws and skill checks.
Factor: For each additional +1 bonus assessed to all three of these categories, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +2. - Grant a +4 morale bonus to either attack rolls, saving throws or skill checks.
Factor: For each additional +1 bonus assessed to one of these categories, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +2.
Fortify creature cannot be made permanent.[/sblock]
I think it might be worthwhile to increase the base duration of epic seeds when possible, scaling back the effects by 4 USP for 10-fold increases, or 8 USP for 100-fold increses. This might be easier than trying to manage dramatic increases in duration with the Extend factor, or exponential factors. If a 10-fold increase is appropriate, let it be in the base seed. If it isn't appropriate, let them pay through the nose for it.
Despite our revision of the base seed costs (to 4 + 2 x level) I'm still keeping my version of the Animate Dead seed at USP 20. I sort of think of it as a conflation of animate dead and an hour casting time (USP 14 + 6) together with create greater undead cast as a standard action (USP 20). But mostly I like it because the numbers scale so nicely; it is like having the energy seed do 10d6 at a cost of 10 USP, with each +1d6 costing +1 SP. (The dispel seed has a similar numerical elegance).
[sblock=text of Animate Dead]Seed: Animate Dead
Necromancy [Evil]
Root Spell: Animate dead, create undead, create greater undead
Spellcraft Prerequisite: 20+
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: One or more corpses touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
The caster can turn the bones or bodies of dead creatures into undead skeletons or zombies that follow his or her spoken commands, or alternatively create more powerful undead which he or she must control through some other means. A destroyed undead can’t be animated again.
At a base Spellcraft Prerequisite of 20, the caster can use the animate dead seed to create undead:
- Up to 40 HD of skeletons and/or zombies may be created. The undead can follow the caster, or they can remain in an Area and attack any creature (or a specific type of creature) entering the place. The undead remain animated until they are destroyed, and remain under the caster’s control indefinitely.
Factors: For each additional 2 HD of undead created, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +1. - Control: A caster can naturally control 4 HD per caster level of mindless undead creatures he or she has personally created, regardless of the method used. If the caster exceeds this natural limit, newly created creatures fall under his or her control, and excess undead from previous castings become uncontrolled (the caster chooses which creatures are released). If the caster is a cleric, any undead he or she commands through his or her ability to command or rebuke undead do not count toward the natural limit.
Factor: For every 4 HD of skeletons or zombies that will not count towards the natural limit, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +1. These undead will be automatically controlled. - The caster can also create undead other than skeletons and zombies, including intelligent undead and undead with templates: a templated undead is built upon the race, class, hit dice and abilities which the target creature or character possessed in life. Intelligent undead can follow more sophisticated commands and have a base attitude of indifferent, but are not automatically under the control of the caster. The caster may create any single undead. This has a Spellcraft Prerequisite of 20, or twice the CR of the undead created, whichever is higher.
- Multiple undead of the same type can be created as long as the total challenge of the created undead is less than one quarter the square of the Spellcraft Prerequisite.
Sepulchrave II
Legend
I'll get to reponding to other posts in a while - I've gotta get this out there before I lose the thoughts.
* Re: "Overcome Specific Immunity" factor - Maybe we should ditch it altogether and replace it w/ feats which do the same, but with peripheral benefits - c.f. Music of the Gods.
Music Of The Gods [Epic]
Prerequisites: Cha 25, Perform 30 ranks, bardic music class feature.
Benefit: Your bardic music can affect even those normally immune to mind-affecting effects. However, such creatures gain a +10 bonus on their Will saves to resist such effects.
I think that +10 SP is too cheap for this as a factor - the consistent number (2SP =+1DC) would be +20 (which is what it was in a prior draft). But I think that at +20, the factor would see no use - or would see use in spells tailored only to counter a single specific threat.
MotG can potentially see a lot of use - 30/day for a 30th-level bard who is running into lots of vampires, say. And with a save of 10+ lvl/2+ Cha mod, it scales very nicely as well - at lvl 30, it's effectively a 15th level spell already.
I think [Epic Magic] feats with stiffer prerequisites could fit the bill. I'm inclined to make them Spellcraft 33 rank entry feats with Epic Skill Focus (Spellcraft) prerequisites (effectively +10 SP anyway), waive the Saving Throw penalty and make them specific to each immunity with an added perk or two.
E.g.
Ineluctable Necromancy [Epic][Epic Magic]
Prerequisites: Epic Spellcasting, Epic Skill Focus (Spellcraft), Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus (Necromancy), Spellcraft 33 ranks.
Benefit: Whenever you cast an epic spell with the [Death] descriptor, its effects extend even to creatures who are normally immune to such effects. Furthermore, if the target of one of your epic spells with the [Death] descriptor is warded by a nonepic spell which would normally prevent [Death] attacks (such as death ward), you are entitled to an opposed caster level check in order to penetrate the spell: if your caster level check succeeds, the protective spell is not dispelled, only momentarily suppressed.
Too much? Not enough? On the wrong track?
* Re: "Overcome Specific Immunity" factor - Maybe we should ditch it altogether and replace it w/ feats which do the same, but with peripheral benefits - c.f. Music of the Gods.
Music Of The Gods [Epic]
Prerequisites: Cha 25, Perform 30 ranks, bardic music class feature.
Benefit: Your bardic music can affect even those normally immune to mind-affecting effects. However, such creatures gain a +10 bonus on their Will saves to resist such effects.
I think that +10 SP is too cheap for this as a factor - the consistent number (2SP =+1DC) would be +20 (which is what it was in a prior draft). But I think that at +20, the factor would see no use - or would see use in spells tailored only to counter a single specific threat.
MotG can potentially see a lot of use - 30/day for a 30th-level bard who is running into lots of vampires, say. And with a save of 10+ lvl/2+ Cha mod, it scales very nicely as well - at lvl 30, it's effectively a 15th level spell already.
I think [Epic Magic] feats with stiffer prerequisites could fit the bill. I'm inclined to make them Spellcraft 33 rank entry feats with Epic Skill Focus (Spellcraft) prerequisites (effectively +10 SP anyway), waive the Saving Throw penalty and make them specific to each immunity with an added perk or two.
E.g.
Ineluctable Necromancy [Epic][Epic Magic]
Prerequisites: Epic Spellcasting, Epic Skill Focus (Spellcraft), Spell Focus and Greater Spell Focus (Necromancy), Spellcraft 33 ranks.
Benefit: Whenever you cast an epic spell with the [Death] descriptor, its effects extend even to creatures who are normally immune to such effects. Furthermore, if the target of one of your epic spells with the [Death] descriptor is warded by a nonepic spell which would normally prevent [Death] attacks (such as death ward), you are entitled to an opposed caster level check in order to penetrate the spell: if your caster level check succeeds, the protective spell is not dispelled, only momentarily suppressed.
Too much? Not enough? On the wrong track?
Last edited:
Similar Threads
