Epic Magic Big Thread

[Sepulchrave II]

Seed: Fortify Creature
Transmutation

Root Spell: Bull’s strength, barkskin, heroism, stoneskin, spell resistance, etc.
Spellcraft Prerequisite: 14+

The problem here is that the root spell is no longer bull's strength - it is a hypothetical 5th-level greater bull's strength which has different level caps and a different initial bonus (+10 vs. +4). The same applies to the other roots (subseeds? subroots? nodules?)

Bear in mind that I'm aiming for maximum transparency here, and I'm really trying to avoid non-core spells. I'm not saying its not logical or necessarily unbalanced. It just doesn't sit within the design parameters of the system I'm trying to achieve.

And that's not to say that I'm unwilling to change the design parameters, either. It might be desirable for the root spell to be more 'representative', rather than directly inform the Spellcraft Prerequisite. It makes extrapolation of new seeds somewhat harder, though.

The caster can choose to develop a spell which grants a +10 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.
(A Spellcraft Prerequisite of 14 corresponds to a 5th level spell. Bull’s strength gives a base +4 enhancement as a 2nd level spell; I extrapolate this to a +10 bonus at 5th level, and halve the rate thereafter.)

If you base it directly off of bull's strength (at SP 8 instead of SP 14) with the same factor progression (+1 per +2 SP) it will net you 3 points less to your ability score. I think that the transparency here is worth it, unless there is a really compelling balance argument to suggest that an SP 24 spell should grant a +15 enhancement bonus to Str rather than +12; or why an SP 50 spell should grant you +28 instead of +25.

The fortify creature seed can also be used to grant 5 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.
(A +10 Con bonus grants this many hit points. Rather than also give a Fortitude save bonus, the hit points are made temporary.)

I agree with the principle and the progression (I made changes to fortify earlier today), but I think the initial bonus should be +2 not +5, for the same reasons as noted above.

Same issues with barkskin and stoneskin.

The fortify ability seed can grant spell resistance 32.
Factor: Each additional point of spell resistance increases the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +1.
(Spell resistance)

No problem here

Grant a +4 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.
(Heroism is +2 at 3rd level. +1 per spell level to 5th level, then slow down.)

It's a shame that greater heroism conflates temporary hp and [fear] immunity with its +4 bonus as well as having a 1 min/level (as opposed to 10 min/level) duration. It's sor/wiz 6 or bard 5. Whilst I'd be comfortable equating it without the temp hp and [fear] immunity at sor/wiz 5 and a 20 minute duration, it's still a hypothetical spell. +1 per +2 SP is certainly viable, though - I'm inclined to snag that. Even though +1 per +3 SP is based on the gap between heroism and greater heroism it seems overly punitive.

Grant a +6 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.
(Narrowing the focus of the spell is equivalent to a -4 mitigating factor)

Superior resistance (6th level, SC: p. 174) grants a +6 resistance bonus to saves for 24 hrs. This one is a morale bonus which lasts 20 mins. Seems OK - they're stackable so +1 per 2 SP looks fair.

Skill checks are fine, as Spellcraft was only ever the problem, anyway.

Your 20-minute true strike now has a USP of 42.

Though if you're going to split the provision into attack, saving throws and skill check bonuses, maybe you should go the whole hog and make them insight bonuses, resistance bonuses and competence bonuses respectively.

Fortify creature cannot be made permanent.

amen.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Bear in mind that I'm aiming for maximum transparency here, and I'm really trying to avoid non-core spells. I'm not saying its not logical or necessarily unbalanced. It just doesn't sit within the design parameters of the system I'm trying to achieve.

I looked through the design goals you posted, and all I could find was this:

The mechanics of the system should be transparent – i.e., where a specifc rule exists, its source should be readily apparent to a player. This makes any further rulings as necessitated by play easier to judge.

I didn't take this as referring to specific numerical values. A hypothetical auroch's strength which gives a +10 bonus and lasts for 1 minute per level is clearly based on bull's strength and works the same as bull's strength if game play necessitates a ruling. It thus satisfies the requirement of transparency as stated. If your intention is to follow the base spells a lot more closely, then you definitely need to revise the durations and components of the seeds to bring them into line.

As for the rate I advanced them- well, a 5th level bull's strength that gives only +7 seemed too wimpy to me. I guess it comes down to intuition: does owl's insight seem obviously overpowered? If not, then why does auroch's strength? I think I should change the progression so it only gives even bonuses, though.

Superior resistance (6th level, SC: p. 174) grants a +6 resistance bonus to saves for 24 hrs. This one is a morale bonus which lasts 20 mins. Seems OK

I don't know how best to deal with duration disparities. Suppose I take your suggestion and change the save type to resistance. Then we have a 6th level spell (admittedly not core, but useful to test our theories) that lasts 72 times as long as a 5th level spell to which it is otherwise identical. You might feel ok about this, but I feel uneasy.

Your 20-minute true strike now has a USP of 42.

Yeah. The entry-level version is only about +10. I believe Upper_Krust pointed out that higher level spells are more than the sum of the metamagic feats used to reach them. Higher level spells have higher DCs, higher damage caps, greater areas and longer durations than lower level spells. The difference between a 7th level spell and a 3rd level spell is a lot more than can be bridged by 4 levels worth of metamagic feats. In fact, I think that 1 spell level is more like 5 levels of metamagic feats. Heightened, multiply extended, etc.. Still, even +5 levels of metamagic is not enough to extend a spell 71 times.

Upper_Krust's epic spell system uses 10th and higher level spells. The conversion rate with the ELH is roughly Spell level = 7 + (Spellcraft DC / 10). I'm pegging your system (with generally lower numbers than the ELH) as Spell level = 6 + (Spellcraft DC / 6). That USP 42 20-minute true strike would thus be a 13th level spell. A character with 4 Improved Spell Capacity feats (and a 23 intelligence) could research and cast 20-minute true strike and memorize it in his 13th level spell slot.

Upper_Krust is not good with deadlines (he'd be the first to admit this), and I wouldn't expect the Grimoire to be available any time soon. Maybe in six months, maybe in a year.

You can fix the "+10 weapons for your whole army" issue by turning the effect into a variant on an Emanation - that is, sure, it will make all the weapons in the area +10 weapons... but only so long as they remain in the area. If you want to equip an army, you'll need to make sure your entire army fits in the area of the spell, and stays in the spell's area for the duration. You can maybe make it a mobile area, but your army is still limited to a formation of some kind, and subject to point-blank anhiliation from area effects.

I was thinking of something like that. There are already rule differences in place between benefical spells made to affect an area and spells that are harmful, so further tinkering wouldn't be inappropriate. But the issue seems akin to changing durations from minutes to hours or making verdigris tsunami's cost less exorbitant; how do you increase a numerical quantity dramatically without drastically overpricing the spell?

 

[Sepulchrave II]

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.
(The challenge of a group of monsters is the sum of the squares of the CRs of the monsters in it.)

[Edited in case comment misinterpreted as snarkiness rather than irony.]

So let's take two CR 15 undead (say 2 x 13th-level wizard vampires).

Challenge = 450
=> USP = (sq. rt.) 1800
=> USP = 42 (rounded down)

Or two CR 22 undead (say 2 x 20th level wizard vampires)

Challenge = 968
=> USP = (sq. rt.) 3872
=> USP = 62 (rounded down)

My resistance...is....failing...


Or ten dire wraiths

Challenge = 1210
=> USP = (sq. rt.) 4840
=> USP = 69 (rounded down)

Or 1000 vampire spawn

Challenge = 16,000
=> USP = (sq. rt.) 64,000
=> USP = 252

This is achievable at 30th level: Sor 30 (Cha 36; Ritual Adept, Cabal Leader, Epic Leadership): (-116 SP from cabal; -30 SP casting time; -20 Power Component; -40 xp burn; -13 backlash). It'll cost him 100K materials, burn 10,000 xp and take one month. Note that the cabal conrribution is speculative - I'm thinking about modifying the input from other casters so that there is not a linear relationship between spell levels contributed and mitigating factors, but rather it accounts for the size of the cabal informed by the Epic Leadership feat.

Edit: I dunno. You burn 3 epic feats to get the cabal benefits. Mitigating factors should be pretty hefty.

You know, the thing that I think is saddest about the community's rejection of epic magic is just how easy it is to some up with some amazingly cool spells just by fiddling with numbers. I mean, what's not to love about an epic spell which creates an army of vampire spawn?

BTW, Some kind of epic [divine] feat which focuses on animate dead and slay would be nice, but it trespasses on Destroyer of Life. Maybe roll animate dead into the existing feat and reduce mitigation to -10? Thing is, slay and destroy are potent: hence the 2 seeds vs Magnificat's 3.

I think that if we go CHI/RHO with animate dead (and summon, I guess), then some quick reference tables on various USPs would be in order.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Are you trying to be purposely intelligible?

You're killin' me, here.
[edit- no offense taken! ]

But yeah, those examples look right. I've never seen a question mark used as square root sign, though.

Some kind of epic [divine] feat which focuses on animate dead and slay would be nice, but it trespasses on Destroyer of Life. Maybe roll animate dead into the existing feat and reduce mitigation to -10? Thing is, slay and destroy are potent: hence the 2 seeds vs Magnificat's 3.

IMO the seeds should be aids to designing spells, not ways of partitioning epic spells into balanced segments. It's like the spell schools prior to specialization; it didn't matter if one school was "better" than another. When wizards began to specialize it became necessary to balance the lists better, but I'd hate to have to impose another constraint on the epic magic system.

Especially since if the schools are balanced at non epic levels, they should be balanced at epic levels too. (Note the weasel words "If" and "should be"). So I suggest that these feats be based on the school that the base seed belongs to. Destroyer of Life could work on all seeds with a necromantic base (so not destroy, since it is based on disintegrate, but they'd get afflict instead) and Magnificat could work on conjuration based seeds. I think Magnificat should only summon or call good creatures, btw. Even if the cleric is lawful neutral and can summon devils. This fits the flavor of the feat (and the allusion of the feat's name), and also constrains its scope a little.

I suspect that the balance between schools has been shaken a bit by the formulation of hte seeds. The way temporary hit points have been transferred from Necromancy (false life, vampiric touch) into Transmutation, say. But given the opportunity cost involved in the use of these feats I doubt it makes much difference. Mechanically it really doesn't matter how many seeds they can affect, since they can only be used on one spell a day. Tying bonuses by the school of the seeds seems to preserve flavor while simultaneously providing a rigorous standard to determine whether the bonus applies. No matter how eeevil a spell might be, if it is based on the fortify seed it can't benefit from Destroyer of Life.

My resistance...is....failing...

I think that if we go CHI/RHO with animate dead (and summon, I guess), then some quick reference tables on various USPs would be in order.

You mean a table of doubled square roots? The USP for those 1000 vampire spawn is twice the square root of 1000 times the CR of the vampire spawn. The USP for those two CR 15 vampire wizards is twice the square root of two times the CR of a single vampire wizard. And so on.

I suppose I shouldn't underestimate the innumeracy of players. Even though there is a lot of arithmatic in this game, and taking square roots is not that big a step past adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing, it is still possible that someone will get scared off because he hasn't yet learned to use the square root key on his calculator.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Or 1000 vampire spawn

Challenge = 16,000
=> USP = (sq. rt.) 64,000
=> USP = 252

This is achievable at 30th level: Sor 30 (Cha 36; Ritual Adept, Cabal Leader, Epic Leadership): (-116 SP from cabal; -30 SP casting time; -20 Power Component; -40 xp burn; -13 backlash). It'll cost him 100K materials, burn 10,000 xp and take one month. Note that the cabal conrribution is speculative - I'm thinking about modifying the input from other casters so that there is not a linear relationship between spell levels contributed and mitigating factors, but rather it accounts for the size of the cabal informed by the Epic Leadership feat.

Edit: I dunno. You burn 3 epic feats to get the cabal benefits. Mitigating factors should be pretty hefty.

I am not sure if you think this spell is too powerful, or not powerful enough. If I were this sorcerer I'd round up 1000 victims and have a low level vampire I control energy drain them to death. That's doable without any epic magic at all. Now if you wanted to despoil the 900 sarcophagi in the Temple crypts... that would be a different issue entirely.

I suspect when you talk into 1000 targets you are well into the range where the rule set is breaking down. It's like changing a spell's duration from minutes to hours using Extend Spell. I'm thinking about the issue, but I don't think I'm close to a solution. My gut feeling is that the spell listed above is actually quite underpowered.

 

[Greybar]

A quick note on breaking energy into five sections - where would holy or profane damage come from? I did a second scan through the seeds and didn't see one based on "Holy Smite" or somesuch. Since I dislike "untyped" factors and damage, I like spelling out the seeds for each kind of damage.

In fact, I'm wondering if some means might be used to avoid the "buff six different ways" approach. For instance, should some level of Divination be required to add an "Insight" bonus. Shouldn't a secular caster be prohibited from adding "sacred/profane" bonuses? Should morale bonuses be prohibited to casters who have specialized themselves out of the Enhantment school? Probably more work than it's worth, and pehaps better under a subheading of "suggestions for GMs reviewing epic spell proposals" or somesuch.

 

[Cheiromancer]

A quick note on breaking energy into five sections - where would holy or profane damage come from? I did a second scan through the seeds and didn't see one based on "Holy Smite" or somesuch. Since I dislike "untyped" factors and damage, I like spelling out the seeds for each kind of damage.

Heck, we don't even have sonic damage yet.

Yeah, some seeds are missing. A quick fix is to take a representative spell (cast at level 20) and convert it to a spell seed by doubling its level and adding 4. Then apply factors to it. Tinker as necessary; some spells are more representative than others.

In fact, I'm wondering if some means might be used to avoid the "buff six different ways" approach. For instance, should some level of Divination be required to add an "Insight" bonus. Shouldn't a secular caster be prohibited from adding "sacred/profane" bonuses? Should morale bonuses be prohibited to casters who have specialized themselves out of the Enhantment school? Probably more work than it's worth, and pehaps better under a subheading of "suggestions for GMs reviewing epic spell proposals" or somesuch.

A good system for determining bonus types is kinda lacking too. I suppose it all depends on the seed, and that is determined by the base spell.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

I've never seen a question mark used as square root sign, though.

Nor had I until this morning.

I suggest that these feats be based on the school that the base seed belongs to. Destroyer of Life could work on all seeds with a necromantic base (so not destroy, since it is based on disintegrate, but they'd get afflict instead) and Magnificat could work on conjuration based seeds. I think Magnificat should only summon or call good creatures, btw. Even if the cleric is lawful neutral and can summon devils. This fits the flavor of the feat (and the allusion of the feat's name), and also constrains its scope a little.

If

Magnificat=> conjure, heal, life, summon [good] creatures only, call [good] creatures only
Destroyer of Life => afflict, animate dead, harrow, slay

Then that leaves Epic Thaumaturgy out of the loop: although, honestly, I think I'd prefer it if this were a feat that sor/wiz could take anyway.

There is infinte room for more feats, I've barely touched them. And I'd like a mechanic which doesn't simply reduce the mitigating factor. One that occurred to me is

EXCELLENT MAGIC [EPIC]
Prerequisites: Epic Spellcasting, Knowledge (Arcana) 30 ranks, Spellcraft 30 ranks, Spell Focus in three schools of magic.
Benefit: Three times per day, when you cast any epic or nonepic spell with an XP component, you may ignore up to 2000XP in burn which the spell would normally require.
Special: You can take this feat multiple times. Each time you take it, you may use Excellent Magic an additional three times per day.

Obviously mirrored off of the rod of the same name, this equates to a -8 free mitigating factor to three epic spells per day - effectively at the cost of an epic spell slot - but with the added perk of being able to partially offset arcane penalties for [I[life[/I] and heal as well as costs for wish etc. Natural choice for an Archmage. Don't know if it's balanced, though.

as opposed to

SPIRITBURNER [EPIC]
Prerequisites: Epic Spellcasting, Epic Skill Focus (Knowledge: Religion, Arcana or Nature), Spellcraft 30 ranks.
Benefit: All of the XP costs which you would normally incur in any casting any Epic Spell are halved. The actual XP cap for a spell (500XP/level) is based on your normal limit, and is not affected.

this one scales very differently. It's effectively worth 2 epic feats (or is it?). I like the idea of bringing Epic Skill Focus (relevant knowledge skill) into the mix, though. A 30th-level character gains an extra -30, a 40th-level character -40 etc. A double syneresis gives you a flat -20, but you only need to take the feat once, and you have the option of not preparing syneretic spells - which frees up epic slots. And you don't have to burn XP, which always stings.

Epic Thaumaturgy might be

EPIC THAUMATURGY [EPIC]
Prerequisites: Epic Spellcasting, Spell Focus (Abjuration), Spell Focus (Conjuration), Knowledge (the planes) 27 ranks.
Benefit: When you use an epic spell to summon any outsiders or elementals with the extraplanar subtype, the base duration of the summon seed is considered to be 10 minutes, instead of 20 rounds: subsequent increases in duration are based on this new duration. If you use a spell with the banish seed to target any outsiders or elementals with the extraplanar subtype, you gain a +10 bonus to defeat the targets' Spell Resistance and a +10 bonus to the Save DC of the spell which incorporates the banish seed.

=>This equates to 20 free factors (plus a lot more, as the duration scales differently now) in the first instance, and 30 in the second - which might be a little much - but you see where I'm going with this.

 

[Cheiromancer]

Excellent Magic and Spiritburner have great synergy, don't they?

I like them, but it makes me think there are potential problems with syneresis: it's too weak unless you burn lots of slots, and then it is too strong. I'm starting to worry about a system that tempts DMs to make kamikaze NPCs that burn all their resources in one encounter. Or a system that gives a min-maxing player the ability to fight *way* above their weight every once in a while. It makes things unstable.

You know, the more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that there needs to be a limit to how much an epic spell can be mitigated. With massive cabals of ritual spellcasters, month long casting times, incredible donations of xp and oodles of feats there is nothing preventing moderately epic characters (30-something) from getting access to magic that is way, way above them. It's an element of instability in the game that just doesn't add to the fun of it.

To bring the design space into a manageable shape I think we should say that mitigating factors can't reduce a spell by more than half. So a 21st level caster just can't research a spell with a USP of 49. A 40th level caster finds a USP 87 spell tantalizingly beyond his reach, and so on. I think this gives players (and DMs) lots of room to play around in. If you are looking at a 37th level character you can ignore spells that have a USP above 80, and thus focus your attention on other spells with a more realistic power level.

It will increase variety among epic casters. Different epic casters will use different methods of mitigating things. But nobody will try to include every known method of mitigation (ritual casting plus long casting times plus xp burn plus power components plus dark subsumption plus...), because after a while there's no benefit.


****

I have an ulterior motive for this. I want to consider using factors that scale geometrically, but I want access to them to be gradual. As characters get higher level they should be able to move beyond tactical scale spells and on to magic that affects whole battlefields. But widening a fireball to a blast radius of 2000 ft. is beyond the scope of these rules at any reasonable level of difficulty- the verdigris tsunami problem. Or teleporting cities, or putting a country in stasis; things like that. While I doubt that 40th level characters should be teleporting cities, this might be an option for a 100th level character.

The key factors are

double the duration (as if extended): +2 USP
double the range (as if enlarged): +2 USP
double the volume (as if widened): +6 USP

Six doublings (+12 USP) turns a duration in minutes to a duration in hours. This kind of jump is not unprecedented among the PHB spells. It would break the spells/day mechanic if they are further extended to days or weeks; I propose a fix below.

Doubling the range is intended to make close range spells into long range spells (after 4 doublings). I'd allow applications of this factor to make a wall (or other shapable spell) longer; a second set could make it thicker, a third would make it higher. Which works out to be the same as widening it. For cones and emanations and spheres and such you have to use widen.

Repeated iterations of widen allow one to tackle verdigris tsunami types of spells. I won't detail that spell, but a 50-fold increase in radius can be costed at +34 USP. A 100-fold increase in radius is a nice +40 USP. (Each +2 USP multiplies by 1.26, since three such muliplications doubles the original quantity.)

If you want to be brave, factors that double the number of targets is +8 USP. Doubling the damage (sorta a double empowered) is also +8 USP. So that's a 160d6 fireball for a total USP of 42. You can see how this will get out of hand pretty quick. But that it is also a nice mechanic for making a hellball or vengeful gaze of god that's actually worth casting.

I'm still thinking of how such things should be kept under control. What I'm leaning toward right now is to say that mitigating factors (including the 50% rule) are applied prior to adding geometrical factors. This would mean that the 160d6 fireball can't be mitigated significantly. They can add in -5 to reduce the base seed, but the +32 can't be touched. The spell has a minimum SP of 37, and so you need a 34th level caster. A 26th level caster can manage an 80d6 fireball, though. 280 hp fire damage seems pretty epic. Critters have a lot of hit points and resistances at that level, so I don't think it is too much. It might break down after a few more doublings. But I don't know anything about play for 50th level characters.

A character doesn't have to use geometrical rules, of course. There are probably cases where a better effect can be made by using the regular factors and then mitigating them down. For really big effects you'd want to geometrical progressions.

As a special patch for greatly extended spells, perhaps an epic spell slot doesn't recharge until the extended spell expires. Effectively they are embedding an epic spell slot for the spell's duration.

Anyway, that's what I'm thinking of.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Excellent Magic and Spiritburner have great synergy, don't they?

I had thought one or the other, not both - hence the 'as opposed to'. Should've been more explicit. There is no way that I'd allow both of these.

I like them, but it makes me think there are potential problems with syneresis: it's too weak unless you burn lots of slots, and then it is too strong. I'm starting to worry about a system that tempts DMs to make kamikaze NPCs that burn all their resources in one encounter. Or a system that gives a min-maxing player the ability to fight *way* above their weight every once in a while. It makes things unstable.

Same occurred to me. You could limit the number of spell slots which syneresis allows as a function of Spellcraft ranks, though.

To bring the design space into a manageable shape I think we should say that mitigating factors can't reduce a spell by more than half.

I've thought about this, as well - not necessarily half, but some other function of total Spellcraft ranks. I think 50% is overly restrictive. The biggest problem is engineering some system which limits the cabal contribution, which is why I've been thinking about a nonlinear relationship between spell slots contributed vs. total mitigating factor.

I have an ulterior motive for this. I want to consider using factors that scale geometrically, but I want access to them to be gradual.

I have been here exactly before - but when I was trying to modify the Spellcraft check system, rather than base factors off of seeds with a more stable DC/Prerequisite. I haven't revisited the idea for a while.

My biggest concern was the precedent (doublings, triplings, quadruplings), which is why I considered a set of static factors e.g.

increase area by 100% +4
increase area by 250% +8
increase area by 500% +12
increase arae by 1000% +20
increase area by 2500% +30
increase area by 5000% +40
increase area by 10,000% +50

or whatever. You get the idea.

After a 10000% increase in area (ie. a 2000ft. radius fireball), you use aggregates (in this case Magical Weather) for truly awesome effects. Although as written, Magical Weather can't be used with instantaneous effects.

I actually don't have a problem with massive area effects, as an improved invisible 6th level wizard with a wand of fireballs who can fly can already level a small town pretty quickly: all it takes is a scroll and a partially-charged wand. Your highest level local opposition might be a 6th level cleric - if you're unlucky. Killing 2000 people in 1 minute is easy.

So what, if you can obliterate 100 square miles of countryside? Encounters aren't balanced on this basis - really, its campaign backstory. After your 2-mile radius fire storm hits, all you've done is kill a lot of mooks: you might get some arbitrary story bonus to XP, but the BBEG is still there laughing off the damage.

I think if we go this route, there needs to be a pretty solid philosophical justification in the way epic games are handled, though. A lot of people will cry 'foul' and 'overpowered', but, for me, this is exactly the kind of thing epic play should be about.