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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sepulchrave II" data-source="post: 3077252" data-attributes="member: 4303">It seems that the issue here is primarily one of preventing massive overspecialization via an epic spellcasting route, and reducing the possible overinvestment in Epic Spellcasting and feats which apply to it.I am not necessarily averse to the double-spell idea ( <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /> in fact, the more oblique references to 'double' the better) - seriously though, in terms of moderating the power curve, I think it has a lot of merit.I do think that the potential for extreme specialization is a good idea, though - just that it needs to be slowed down somewhat. I also think that the fact that the original system is 'level-less' is a good thing - it distinguishes epic spellcasting qualitatively from conventional magic. I'm not sure about the knots which your system proposes via 6 +SP/6This has been touched on before, but a quick fix to the current issues with the system might also be:1) Give the Epic Spellcasting feat the [Epic Magic] tag. Give all feats which pertain to it the [Epic Magic] tag.2) Feats which have the [Epic Magic] tag can only be taken as general feats, never as bonus feats gained by virtue of a character's class. This will slow progression by 50%, and force more conventional feat choices as well. 3) Allow Improved Metamagic to offer a -2 mitigating factor to epic spells per feat. I agree Improved Metamagic should synergize with both conventional and epic magic.Dbf and the pumped up finger of death are actually poor illustrations of my point, because of the emphasis on spell-level dependent functions (Save DC and/or increased damage). It occurred to me on the bus yesterday (I think on the bus a lot), that if we work backwards from dbf we have a 6th-level spell which deals 20d6 (standard for a 6th-level spell) and forces a save of 16 + modifier (standard for a 6th level spell).The question should therefore be what other benefit should dbf offer which fireball doesn't - apparently this is the 'delay' aspect (+3 levels). If this is true, then a swift, stilled, silent 25d6 fireball should be balanced as a 9th-level spell. With two level-dependent functions removed from the metamagic equation, this actually works pretty well. The problem is gauging things without these clear-cut functions.</blockquote>

Verification