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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cheiromancer" data-source="post: 3091175" data-attributes="member: 141">[Summon] is good, but I'd lower the base CR and increase the duration by a few steps.  I'd also add a factor to make it a Conjuration (Creation) effect; i.e. not subject to protection from evil; maybe +2?  I gather we're *not* standardizing range for the purposes of homogeneity.The relationship between [summon] and [call] intrigues me.  It strikes me that the payments required for long term service (longer than 20 rounds) are much like power components; mitigating factors for additional duration factors.  That xp cost also looks like a mitigating factor.  I wonder if these seeds can be harmonized.Metaphysically, I always think of summonings as being magical constructions (cf <a href="http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#hornofValhalla" target="_blank">Horn of Valhalla</a>), not creatures plucked from some other plane.  A temporary addition to the world, not a transfer of a creature from one region to another.  A calling *is* a transfer, however.  Maybe that is enough for it to be a separate seed, but I doubt it.******I've been thinking about the energy/destroy relationship: One of the constraints on non-epic spells is that the rate that direct damage improves is generally 1d6 per caster level.  If you track the results on a failed save separately from the results on a successful save, you can express this constraint by weighting the changes at a ratio of 0.5 to 1.  For example, +2 caster levels improves the damage of a fireball by 2d6 on a failed save, and 1d6 on a successfull save.  0.5 * 2d6 + 1 * 1d6 = 2d6.  The rate of improvement of a disintegrate also obeys the constraint when expressed in this way.  +2 caster levels improves the damage on a failed save by 4d6, but doesn't affect the result of a successful save.  0.5 * 4d6 + 1 * 0d6 = 2d6.The damage done by a spell usually follows the 1 caster level = 1d6 rule (weighted across saves as in the previous paragraph) but discrepancies could be paid for at the rate of +1d6 = +1 SP, as in the [energy] seed.  For instance, the weighted damage of a 12th disintegrate is 0.5 * 24d6 + 1 * 5d6 = 17d6, which is 5d6 too high; we can assume a +5 SP factor in the cost of disintegrate to compensate. If "Double damage" is a factor worth +8 SP, (based on two Empowers) then we could devise a "Minimal" mitigating factor that causes the damage on a successful save to be calculated on the minimum (base) value of the seed; in the case of the [energy] seed, the base value is 10d6, and the save for half makes it 5d6.  I'm not quite sure what the value of the Minimal factor; I'd think at least -4 but no better than -8.If you model disintegrate as a double damage (+8) enhanced (+8) extra damge (+5) heightened (+6) typeless (+8) individualized (-6) medium range (-2) minimal (-X) fireball, you get a net improvement of  27 - X SP, which at 6 SP per spell level should equal 3 spell levels (the difference between fireball and disintegrate).  If X is 8, then the total of 27 - X SP is just above the target of 18; or just below, if you think that it being a ray rather than a targetted spell is worth -2 at non-epic levels.  But X could also be 4 and the spell would still be just shy of 7th level.  Dunno; maybe splitting the difference at -6 would be best.  The special effect (destruction of the body) is probably worth a point; maybe two.Ice storm can also be seen as a spell modified to affect the role of the saving throw.  If you double the damage done on a successful save, you've effectively changed a save for half spell to a no save spell.  Ice storm does 5d6 damage either way, and 0.5 * 5d6 + 1 * 5d6 = 7.5 d6, just a bit over the amount expected for a spell cast by a 7th level caster.  Part of this damage is effectively typeless (3d6 bludgeoning) and there is also a special effect: reduced movement speed in the area of effect.  The 1 round duration means that extending it will double the damage, which definitely an advantage, though not enough, I don't think, to make up for the fact that the damage fails to improve with caster level.  I wonder if the cap was lowered to 5d6 (a reverse form of Enhance Spell, perhaps?).  All in all it is a very complicated spell, and I haven't finished unravelling it.However, I think adding a "Skew" factor to [energy] might be worth pursuing.  Combine Double Damage  and Minimal at a total cost of, say, +2 SP.  (Treating Minimal as -6 SP).  It doubles the base damage and effects of modifiers on a failed save, but the damage on a successful save is calculated from the base, unenhanced value of the seed (5d6).  A little extra bonus is that the body of a creature killed by a skewed spell is totally destroyed, and can't be raised; a resurrection or better is needed.The "Death" factor could then maximize the damage done by a skewed spell against targets who are subject to death magic.With these two factors in addition to the ones we have already (especially typeless at +8 and individualized at -6) the [destroy] and [slay] seeds would become redundant.</blockquote>

Verification