Epic Magic Big Thread

[Sepulchrave II]

I'm kind of iffy about pushing the [energy] seed up to 40d6 and 2d6/+1SP; a 10th-level area spell would probably have a cap of 30d6 (at 30th level), and would still be advanced at the rate of 1d6/+1SP (full factor): I'm wondering if we should shoot for a 20d6 damage (reflecting 20th caster level), and include other perks to bring it in line with a 10th-level spell. 40d6 seems to step on the toes of [destroy] as well.

You'd have fireball (10SP) enhanced (+4 half-factors); leaving 10SP in half-factors to find. It's tempting to simply add massive flexibility (+10): the caster could choose which kind of energy to deploy at the moment of casting, which kind of shape to use, and probably include sonic effects as well (I'd waive the additional +2). This iteration of [Energy] (walls, chains and rays omitted for the present) would look like this:

[Energy]
Evocation [Acid, Cold, Electricity, Fire or Sonic]

Root Spell: Fireball or lightning bolt
Preferred Mitigation: Backlash
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 120 ft. (line), 60-ft. (cone) or 1200 ft. (spread); see text
Area or Effect: A 120 ft. line, a 60-ft. cone or a 20-ft. radius spread; see text
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Reflex half
Spell Resistance: Yes

This seed uses whichever one of five energy types the caster chooses: acid, cold, electricity, fire or sonic. The type of energy which the caster deploys and the shape of the spell are chosen at the moment of casting.

• A spell developed using the [energy] seed releases a bolt or spread which deals 20d6 points of damage of the appropriate energy type, and all in the spell’s Area must make a Reflex save for half damage. If a line or cone is chosen, it begins at the caster’s fingertips; a spread begins as a pellet of energy which detonates at a distance determined by the caster, unless it strikes some intervening body or barrier, in the same manner as a fireball.
Factors: For each additional 1d6 points of damage dealt, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +1. To extend the spell to include sonic effects, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +4.
Limitation: If the caster chooses a specific type of energy during spell development, reduce the Spellcraft Prerequisite by -4. To further constrain a spell by specifying an acid, cold, electricity or fire effect with a specific area, reduce the Spellcraft Prerequisite by an additional -6.
Special: To develop a spell which uses a force effect instead of an energy effect, reduce the Spellcraft Prerequisite by -2: the spell must specify one of the area types listed above. Such a spell gains the [Force] descriptor and can affect incorporeal creatures.

(I think that to allow a [force] effect is sufficiently divergent from the [energy] seed to insist on prior development).

 

[Cheiromancer]

I'm not necessarily working on the assumption of conventional slots being used to power epic magic - I'm kind of attached to the idea that Epic Spellcasting should be qualitatively different, anyway.

I'm cool with that. I wanted to explore the idea of using 10th+ level slots, but that approach isn't mechanically necessary. I should point out that if Krustean metamagic is the alternative to the Jacobean system, those epic spells better be pretty powerful. AMC is the equivalent of 55 levels of metamagic feat- even the comparatively feeble ISC is the equivalent of two 9th level spell slots, each with a level of metamagic. If Epic Spellcasting is to be shiver-worthy, it has to pack quite a wallop.

I'm kind of iffy about pushing the [energy] seed up to 40d6 and 2d6/+1SP; a 10th-level area spell would probably have a cap of 30d6 (at 30th level), and would still be advanced at the rate of 1d6/+1SP (full factor): I'm wondering if we should shoot for a 20d6 damage (reflecting 20th caster level), and include other perks to bring it in line with a 10th-level spell. 40d6 seems to step on the toes of [destroy] as well.

My thoughts were converging on the conclusion that [destroy], [energy] and [slay] were all manifestations of the same underlying seed. So "stepping on each other's toes" is kinda an understatement.

I guess it's just because it's _epic_ spellcasting. It should send a shiver down your spine, and make you go 'wow.' It's paradigmatically different from regular magic. A caster can still dip into it, or devote a great part of his energies to it.

Although the seeds we've been working with are not qualitatively different from non-epic spells. Except for the aggregates, they are "just more of the same."

Your flexible [energy] seed, for instance, is pretty similar to what a Krustean wizard can do with his spontaneous metamagic. More flexible in some ways, since a Krustean might not have all the right energy substitution and shaping feats to mold it the way a Jacobean could, but a Krustean would likely Enhance and Empower it to a greater degree than a Jacobean can manage. It's kinda a wash.

But now I'm wondering if we do admit Automatic Metamagic Capacity and Metamagic Freedom, whether such a stipulation would become redundant. These feats are flexible, attractive but possibly unbalanced - I'd have to play around a bit with them to determine that. I'm guessing, in fact, that the (Su) type is more of a balancing tool than anything else.

His system is designed to scale robustly into stratospheric levels, but I think part of what keeps it balanced is the notion that "there is always something tougher out there". I admit I don't really know the ins and outs of his system. I took (Su) as meaning that the feats are magical (which makes sense; they manipulate magic, after all) and that while they are ineffective in an antimagic field (where you can't cast spells anyway) they aren't subject to spell resistance, counterspells, or to being dispelled by dispel magic (who would try to counterspell a feat?). If you somehow manage to cast spells in an antimagic field, your method will probably allow your feats to work too. Supernatural (Su) also means the feats don't provoke attacks of opportunity or require Concentration checks, though the associated spells probably do; if the spells didn't for some reason, then modifying them with AMC shouldn't change anything. Supernatural abilities require a standard action to use unless specified otherwise, but I don't think he means that using those feats is a standard action; if it did, how would spontaneous Quickens work? You certainly don't need an action to use the feat and another to cast the spell. Anyway, (Su) is not for balance's sake; it is just a concise way of describing interactions with other parts of the rules.

It's _transvalent_ IMC. I know that the rules that we are considering are _not_ my campaign, but it's impossible for me to not be informed and influenced by it to some degree.

Hey, it's the lingering aroma of your campaign that makes these rules so damn attractive to me. A certain amount of genericization has to take place to make them work in other people's campaigns; mechanical problems have to hammered out that wouldn't faze a DM like you, but the influence of Wyre shouldn't be excluded. The final system should certainly be usable with minimal changes in your campaign, or what's the point?

One thing we haven't considered yet is epic PrCs who would require Epic Spellcasting as a prerequisite feat. A prerequisite of "able to cast 11th level divine spells" just isn't the same.

And "Two Epic Spellcasting Feats" is better?

Really, "transvalent" can refer equally well to the spells being past the 9 slots (10 with cantrips) of conventional magic. And Jacobeans can easily distinguish themselves from the tawdry, flashy manipulations of Krustean spellcasters (though they may be dabblers in Automatic Metamagic themselves). Given that orthodox Krusteans won't have a single ISC, does it really matter whether you call it "Epic Spellcasting" or "Improved Spell Capacity"?

Sure, ISC will probably give you two slots off the bat. But recall that in the ELH casters never started with just one epic spell slot; the minimum was two. Four if you were a cleric with the Animal or Plant domain.

I think the strength of trying to relate the epic spellcasting system to the system of slots and metamagic is in ensuring that it is a realistic option. Neither overpowered nor underpowered. Becoming aware of just what repeated AMC feats can actually do - and recognizing that it just does elegantly what IM and ISC (and the Automatic suite) were capable of - helps frame the discussion.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Your flexible [energy] seed, for instance, is pretty similar to what a Krustean wizard can do with his spontaneous metamagic. More flexible in some ways, since a Krustean might not have all the right energy substitution and shaping feats to mold it the way a Jacobean could.

But we're talking one aspect of one seed here, not the entirety of the system, and it's the [energy] seed - not the [fire] seed or the [sound] seed: it's already been abstracted to a higher level than regular elementally rigid magic. I wouldn't necessarily endorse this level of flexibility for other seeds.

It does raise an interesting question, though - how does metamagic which does not incur a level increase in a spell interact with AMC? Can a caster with the Energy Substitution feat simply swap out the energy type spontaneously without dipping into his umpteen free levels of metamagic?

But a Krustean would likely Enhance and Empower it to a greater degree than a Jacobean can manage.

Precisely why we need some kick-ass feats to beef up the [energy] seed.

My thoughts were converging on the conclusion that [destroy], [energy] and [slay] were all manifestations of the same underlying seed. So "stepping on each other's toes" is kinda an understatement.

It could be framed that way - at least in terms of the 'blast' component of the [energy] seed. It's useful for determining other factors (e.g. the resurrection caveat). I think it's possible to over-abstract, though. Whilst it might be possible to devise a much smaller set of uber-seeds, I don't know that it would necessarily offer any greater utility.

Here's another [destroy]. This one's pretty streamlined.

[Destroy]
Transmutation

Root Spell: Disintegrate
Preferred Mitigation: Backlash
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 1200 ft.
Effect: Ray
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude partial
Spell Resistance: Yes

A spell develped with this seed deals 40d6 points of damage to the target. The damage is of no particular type or energy. The caster must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit, and the target is entitled to a saving throw: if the save is successful, it instead takes 5d6 points of damage. If the target is reduced to –10 hit points or less (or a construct, object, or undead is reduced to 0 hit points), it is utterly destroyed as if disintegrated, leaving behind only a trace of fine dust. Up to a 10-foot cube of nonliving matter is affected, so a spell using the destroy seed destroys only part of any very large object or structure targeted. The destroy seed affects magical matter, energy fields, and force effects that are normally only affected by the disintegrate spell: such effects are automatically destroyed. Unattended magic items are entitled to a saving throw to negate the effect.
Factor: For each additional 2d6 points of damage dealt on a failed save, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +1.
Special: A prismatic wall, prismatic sphere, an antimagic shell, or epic spells incorporating the [ward] seed may also be destroyed if the caster succeeds at an opposed caster level check. A spell which excludes these effects as possible targets gains a -4 reduction in the Spellcraft Prerequisite.

 

[Cheiromancer]

I think it's possible to over-abstract, though. Whilst it might be possible to devise a much smaller set of uber-seeds, I don't know that it would necessarily offer any greater utility.

I was thinking more along the lines of managing the various tags in a systematic way; Besides the elemental energies (and sonic) there is bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage, force damage, divine damage, damage with the death descriptor, positive/negative energy damage, typeless damage, vile damage and so on. The energy seed would be the logical place to lay all these things out.

And we are treating acid, cold, electricity and fire as equivalent, but really there should be a mini-enhancement/drawback (maybe around +1/-1 SP) for each. Cold creating a slippery surface, fire setting things on fire, force not being able to target objects- stuff like that.

Changing the saving throw; or suppose you want there to be no save at all? (Like ice storm). This segues into the wall spells, since they don't have a save. The weird way that [destroy] manages its saves (a constant 5d6 on a successful save) might become intelligible, and a method of increasing it might suggest itself. You could do this in factors, I guess, but the results are really only appropriate for blast spells; and since they would be based on an analysis of damaging spells, it makes sense for them to be here too.

Non-instantaneous effect; how much for a fireball that lasts 1 round/level (doing 20d6 each round)? An analysis of incendiary cloud would be helpful here; again it ties in with non-instantaneous energy effects like the walls. I've thought that extreme weather systems could be modelled as a cantrip-like effect applying to each creature or area once per turn (or hour, or whatever) for the duration. A deep analysis of [energy] might make it apparent how to do this.

The seed could become unwieldy unless one's analysis is very elegant and terse. But as a tool for making energy spells, it would be invaluable.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Non-instantaneous effect; how much for a fireball that lasts 1 round/level (doing 20d6 each round)? An analysis of incendiary cloud would be helpful here; again it ties in with non-instantaneous energy effects like the walls.

I think at this point (purely for utility, to avoid bloat) it would be advantageous to split energy into two seeds; one for instantaneous effects, one for effects which endure - in much the same way as your suggested splitting of [fortify]. Modelling spells like fire storm (1 round duration) and blade barrier would be much easier - the two seeds would share a great number of common factors.

Flame strike is the obvious place to look for divine damage pointers; I'm reluctant to use some of the whacked-out feats from the BoED or the BoVD as anything other than resources for ideas, though.

A flame strike is essentailly a half-enhanced (+2) fireball at reduced range (-2) which does half of its damage as divine damage. The area (cylinder vs. sphere) isn't really pertinent. This would suggest to me that a +8SP modifier would be appropriate to convert all energy damage to divine damage.

Adding an alignment descriptor is also something I've considered: +2 as a full factor seems reasonable (c.f. Consecrate Spell); some kind of arcane restriction might be in order, though (I know, I know - wizards getting the short end of the stick again). I'm wondering if a feat might be a better way to go with this sort of thing.

Meteor swarm, bombardment and field of icy razors should all give pointers to slashing/bludgeoning/piercing damage, but these effects are tied up in convoluted spells. Bombardment is the easiest to unravel.

Bombardment (Drd 8) is a fireball enhanced (+4) with a larger damage die (maybe +1, averaging damage over 20d8) and a half-widened cylindrical area (+1) with the added benefit of possibly burying targets (+4). This suggests that bludgeoning damage would incur no change to the SP; I'm inclined to charge a +2 full factor for changing the [energy] seed to do piercing, slashing or bludgeoning damage. Make that +4, just to be safe: it's at least as useful as sonic energy. Bombardment is a specialty druidic thing, anyway - +4 would correspond to a 1000XP arcane surcharge.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Flame strike appears to have been designed at a time when wizards were the ones with effective damaging spells; it seems to have been nerfed a little. Though druids get it as a 4th level spell. For analyzing spells I use full metamagic levels, including heighten, then convert to SP by doubling, and finally treat 1 (real) spell level as 6 SP.

So fireball + half-enhanced (+2 levels) + heightened (+2 levels) + reduced range (-1 level) + half divine damage (+X/2) = flamestrike. Two levels at 6 SP/level is 12. 3 + X/2 levels = 12 means X = 18 SP. Which is way too high if typeless damage is +10 SP.

If flamestrike were 4th level (as it is for druids), then divine damage would be +6 SP, which is possible, but seems a little low. So between +6 and +18. Kinda a wide margin of error.

[edit] Screwed up the math; 3 + X/2 levels is 6 + X SP = 12, so X = 6. That's for the cleric.
For the druid, there is less heightening, so 2 + X/2 level is 4 + X SP = 6, or X = 2. And that's too low. +6 SP looks good, but I'm inclined to agree that +8 SP for true typeless damage is enough. [/edit]

Are there any special rules or restrictions on divine damage, or is it just a nice name for typeless? If it is effectively typeless, then make it +10.

Fire storm has a 1 round casting time, but instantaneous duration.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Are there any special rules or restrictions on divine damage, or is it just a nice name for typeless?

That really depends on what we do with the [ward] seed.

Fire storm has a 1 round casting time, but instantaneous duration.

I really should read spell descriptions more closely - we've been playing this one wrong for years.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

More oomph for [summon]. Multiple creatures omitted at present.

Seed: Summon
Conjuration (Summoning)

Root Spell: Summon monster suite
Preferred Mitigation: Power Component, XP Burn
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: 75 ft.
Effect: One summoned creature
Duration: 20 rounds (D)
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No

This seed can summon a single outsider or elemental of CR 14 or less. It appears where the caster designates and acts immediately, on his or her turn. It attacks the caster’s opponents to the best of its ability. If the caster can communicate with the outsider, he or she can direct it not to attack, to attack particular enemies, or to perform other actions. The exact type of creature is determined in the spell development process, or the appropriate flexibility factor included.

When the spell that summoned a creature ends, and the creature disappears, all the spells it has cast which remain in effect expire. A summoned creature may not use any innate summoning abilities it may have or otherwise conjure another creature, nor can it use any innate planar travel or teleportation abilities that it might possess. It refuses to cast any spells that would cost it XP, or to use any spell-like abilites which would cost it XP if they were spells. When a caster develops a spell with the summon seed that summons an air, chaotic, earth, evil, fire, good, lawful, or water creature, the completed spell is also of that type.

Factor: For each +1 CR of the summoned outsider or elemental, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +2. To summon a creature from another monster type (such as dragons or aberrations) increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +4.
Flexibility: To create a spell which allows the caster to choose from a pool of up to any 12 predetermined creatures who otherwise fit the spell's criteria, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +4.
Flexibility: To create a spell which allows the caster to summon any creature of up to CR 14 at the moment the spell is cast, increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +10.
Special: A character with summon nature's ally on his or her class spell list may summon animals, plant creatures, feys and magical beasts without incurring the normal surcharge for summoning a monster from a type other than outsider or elemental.


I've changed the factor for summoning a specific non-outsider to +4; it seems more reasonable. It also allows the +10 flexibility factor to apply to any creature summoned up to CR 14. This might be a little too much, though.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Concerns Regarding Corrupt/Consecrate Spell

Each of these feats grants an alignment descriptor to a spell and converts half of the damage to divine damage. Metamagic level adjustment is +1. There is an alignment restriction, but no arcane prohibition. They're noncore, but its hard to shake them.

This is a problem - it makes divine damage cheap. Admittedly, there is no provision for changing *all* damage to divine damage: assuming a target creature is immune to the elemental component, this could be achieved by doubly empowering it and then corrupting/consecrating it for a total of +5 metamagic levels.

Furthermore, how would Metamagic Freedom interact with Consecrate Spell? If you applied Consecrate Spell twice to a spell, would the 'other half' of the damage become divine as well? Half of the remaining non-divine damage?

We have:

• Sonic - effectively typeless against many targets. Affects objects regardless of hardness. Blocked by silence.
• Slashing/piercing/bludgeoning - effectively typeless against the vast majority of targets.
• Force - effectively typeless against the vast majority of targets. Affects incorporeal targets. No effect on objects.
• Divine - effectively typeless, barring circumstances which we contrive.
• Typeless - really typeless.

I'm wondering it we're rating typeless damage too high. If we rate true typeless at +8SP, sonic at +4 and the others at +6 we might be closer to the mark. Should acid be +2?

+10 for typeless damage is based in part upon the metamagic analysis of horrid wilting, but horrid wilting is not indiscriminate - the caster chooses which targets are subject to it within the prescribed area.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Sorry I haven't been as talkative the last day or so; I'm in the early stages of a cold, and it is sapping my energy. :\

I'm wondering it we're rating typeless damage too high. If we rate true typeless at +8SP, sonic at +4 and the others at +6 we might be closer to the mark. Should acid be +2

Very possible. Let's see what the analysis was:

Horrid wilting is an interesting benchmark. Basically it is an enhanced (+4), heightened (+5) typeless(+X), widened(+3), fireball that affects only living targets (-2). 10+X levels of metamagic, +20 + 2X SP, which should come out to +30 for the 5 levels of difference (6 SP per spell level for non-epic spells). Suggesting that "typeless damage" is a +5 metamagic enhancement, or +10 SP full-factor.

If we add "Designate specific targets within an area spell (max 20 targets" at +2 SP, we get +22 + 2X SP = +30, or X = 4. So making a spell do typeless damage is a +4 enhancement, or +8 SP. Making a spell do half typeless damage should therefore be a +2 enhancement (4 SP); do you think Consecrate Spell should have been +2 spell levels?

[edit] My calculations above (in the original post about flamestrike) were wrong; I think the convert to divine damage factor is +6 SP. So converting half the damage should be +1.5 SP. Or 1.5 spell levels. Consecrate Spell is a little strong at +1 spell level (unless there's a drawback to gaining the [good] subtype) [/edit]

For acid; do you mean because fewer creatures have resistance/immunity to acid? Or because it is not halved before applying to the hardness of objects? I don't think the former is quite enough reason- there aren't creatures AFAIK that have vulnerability to acid, and I think the difference is too small. Besides, Energy Substitution doesn't distinguish between the four main elemental energies. For the latter reason (affecting objects better) I think it could be a minor factor (+1 SP) equal to a fireball setting flammable objects ablaze. It could be added, but I don't think it would be automatic.

For bludgeoning/slashing/piercing you might add a factor that says that it does/does not overcome damage resistance. I believe spells that do bsp damage overcome damage reduction as a default, but I think it might be cool to say that sometimes it won't.

Furthermore, how would Metamagic Freedom interact with Consecrate Spell? If you applied Consecrate Spell twice to a spell, would the 'other half' of the damage become divine as well? Half of the remaining non-divine damage?

I don't have the book anymore, so I don't know what the wording is. If you Consecrate a flame strike I don't think it changes anything; half the damage fo a flame strike is already divine. It's like applying multiple Maximizes; only the first does anything.

About the summon seed: I would increase the duration of the Summon Seed (at +4 per duration interval) a few times and let the PCs scale it back (at -4 per) if they felt like it. I'd also change "refuses to cast any spells that would cost it XP..." to wording that indicates the creature is unable to do so, not merely unwilling.