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: 3095290" data-attributes="member: 4303">Assuming:1) Duration increment is a +/-2 half-factor;2) A choice of 12 targets is a +6 half-factor, and we have a spell which is specific;3) 'Concentration' merits a +2 half-factor;4) We have a 1 action/20-round duration 75-ft. spell;The various summon spells as potential roots would yield the following CR results:summon monster IX: CR16; top end (see below).elemental swarm: CR19summon elemental monolith: CR17hellish horde: CR17I've just thought of a problem - the utility of summon monster IX is even greater than I've been figuring. Not only can you summon one of twelve creatures on the IX list, but you have all of those options from I-VIII as well! If we give it almost-sweeping flexibility (+8), then a 1-action epic spell which summons a specific creature should net a CR 16 - no more.:I'm thinking the elemental swarm is aberrant - yet another example of a 'weird druid thing' (shambler, bombardment). In brief, I concur with your assertion that [summon] should be lower; although my reasoning is different.Whilst it might seem trivial to be haggling over a difference of +1CR, I would actually advocate a CR 14 for the seed at this point - not 13 or 15. Strictly speaking, 13 might be more representative but I would appeal on these points:1) A specialist can oh-so-very almost summon a balor or pit fiend without mitigation at lvl 21. I like the carrot which dangles temptingly close - it stretches the caster to push the boundaries. Who wouldn't want to taste those 2 points of backlash? This is more of a gamer's psychology argument than anything else.2) Elemental swarm exists, even if it's an epic spell in nonepic guise.3) A little extra something-something for the incremental jump of nonepic-->epic isn't necessarily a bad thing.4) Pure aesthetics. 14 is nicer than 13.My original idea was to to simply price (in time, cash and XP) the difference in the spell SP - this was to include all modifications.For example, say a caster develops his hellish servitor epic spell at an USP 26 / SP 24 (including 2 points of backlash). Later, when he's 25th level, he modifies it by upping the HD of the outsider to 30 (+6 CR for an outsider at +1CR/+2HD), which is a deviation of 12 factors. He brings it down to an SP 28 spell by including another 8 points of backlash (a deviation of another 8 factors) - the total is a 20-factor deviation from the original spell. Let's say he calls it Nessian Enforcer.These 20 factors would be priced as if for an independently researched spell i.e. 20,000gp/20 days/800 xp - still much less than if he had developed an original USP 38 spell. The caster would now have both spells (original and modified) within his repertoire.Magnum Opus was to address this directly:1) The caster only pays half the associated costs for modifying a spell which he designates as his magnum opus;2) The caster simply prepares his magnum opus in an open epic slot; when he comes to cast the spell, he can choose any variation of the spell from his magnum opus suite.I'm sure additional controls need to be put in place, but that's the bones of it. As all spells in the suite count as the magnum opus, then the caster could subsequently modify his Nessian Enforcer and it would still remain within the suite - maybe when he's 30th-level he wants to Quicken it.Edit: Suggested Control: Maybe the magnum opus should only contain 5 variants of a spell at any one time; as the suite evolves, so the older ideas fall by the wayside.Edit: Maybe we should double development costs.Spell modifications should include only 3 degrees of freedom - i.e. only 3 components (CR, duration, backlash etc.) can be modified; any more would require the development of a new spell.NO, no, no, no.Will check it out.Quicken would only be +4 as a half-factor; you're conflating it with it's full-factor value. I do this all the time too. I'm also working on the assumption that PCs won't be using exponential factors (except mitigating factors) - they're just tools that we're using to balance seeds,</blockquote>

Verification