Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cheiromancer" data-source="post: 3122200" data-attributes="member: 141">I'm ok with the first part of this, but I think that the factor in an epic spell to overcome a generic immunity is about +8, not +12.  And it doesn't involve [dispel].[sblock=Lots of headache inducing calculations and arguments in support of this and other theses.] +8 is 1/3 of the cost of the basic 10th level spell (SP 24).  In kernel notation that same 10th level spell is costed as 60 points, and the size of a kernel that provides a broad immunity is also around 1/3 of that total (20 or so)  So the cost to counteract a protection is exactly equal to the cost of providing it - it's just that we are using different point value currencies to price the two costs, and they look different.  This assymetry is exceptional: most factors have the same value in both currencies; duration and range factors, for instance, are the same on both sides. Here's a kernel analysis of death ward and mind blank.e.g. Death Ward =  level 4 = 24 points = (X + touch +2 + minutes duration +2) X = 20e.g. Mind Blank = level 8 = 48 points = (X + close +6 + hours duration +6) X = 36Mind blank provides two sweeping immunities (mind-affecting spells and divinations), both at about +20.  It is famously debated whether mind blank protects against all divinations, or whether things like true strike work against a mind-blanked opponent.  If true strike works, then maybe the 20 points for immunity to divination got discounted a little; down to 16.  Or maybe true strike doesn't work, but the utility of immunity against divination is limited, and that's the reason for the discount.   But anyway it's about 20 points in kernel currency, which is 8 points in seed currency.  Now that I think about it, Death ward provides against two kinds of effects too; death effects and negative energy effects.  More on that later.Hmmm.  I wonder what the kernel value of protection from energy is?  Let's seelevel 3 spell = 18 = (X + touch +2 + 10s of minutes +4) so X = 12.  Maybe a little higher, since protection from energy has a limited buffer (120 points).  Fold in +8 enhancement to the protection (so it caps out at 240), and X is 20.  That's in kernel units; in seed units it would be 8.  What did we say the modifier for typeless energy was again? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />It seems to me that the use of these factors does not simply negate or suppress the relevant protection (in which case buttressing the death ward might help) it changes it so the immunity is irrelevant.  Fire resistance is not going to help against typeless energy; death ward isn't going to help against an epic blasphemy.I'm strongly tempted to make death magic a +6 factor that maximizes damage against a creature subject to death magic.  I think the factor is really a +9 but it automatically includes the -4 "only affects living creatures" and  the minor (+1) "victims killed in this way cannot be raised" factor.  +9 is a fair cost for Maximize Spell, since it is semi-exponential (it almost doubles the damage done).  All of these are values in both kernel and seed currencies.  I think I've suggested that finger of death is really a disintegrate modified by this factor.  Disintegrate, in turn, is an [energy] effect modified by the "skew" factor, which doubles damage on a failed save, but caps the dice on a successful save at the same value as the base kernel.  For [energy] the kernel is the 10d6/5d6 of fireball or lightning bold.  Skewed it is 20d6/5d6, and enhanced it is 40d6/5d6.  Add death magic and it is 240/30.  A finger of death kills you on a failed save and does 3d6+20 points of damage on a failed save; average 30.5.  I wonder if it is a coincidence that the hp damage assigned to "death" is the same as the hp damage to be absorbed by "energy immunity"?  It seems like as far as the core spells go, they were treating 240 hp as "infinite".  Anyway, here's the kernel analysis in less verbose form:Disintegrate (damage 4 + enhance +8 + medium +8 + heightened +6 + typeless +8 + skew +2 + 1 no raise dead = 37)/6 = 6th levelFinger of death (damage 4 + enhance +8 + close +6 + heightened +8 + typeless +8 + skew +2 + death magic +6 = 42)/6 = 7th level The point is that you can dispense with death magic if you do enough damage; death magic can be modeled by direct damage spells that do an awful lot of damage on a failed save.  I don't know if we've finished with the blast half of the [energy] seed, but if we expect jacobean casters to keep up with their conventional counterparts it is going to be able to do a heck of a lot of damage, and so there is a powerful argument for folding [slay] into a single factor of the [energy] seed.And if we end up allowing factors like Empower Spell and Maximize Spell (maybe at 3 times their spell level adjustment; i.e. Empower Spell = +6 and Maximize Spell = +9) then it's easy to see that replacing the death magic factor is a +3 or +4 adjustment; just remove the -4 "only affects living targets", which increases the cost by +4, and maybe take off the minor no-raise-dead factor to make it +3.  If we don't allow those factors at any cost (the cumulative use of exponential factors is problematic) then we should at least recognize that they are lurking in the background.Anyway, death effects are part of what death ward protects against; negative energy effects are the other part.  If negative energy is essentially the same as elemental energy, insofar as bypassing it is concerned,  then you can use the +8 we derived from the protection from energy analysis.  So anyway, death ward should be fairly easy to bypass.  A little harder if you are using negative energy than if you are using a death effect, but pretty straightforward nonetheless.I haven't done a parallel analysis for mind-affecting, but I strongly suspect the results would be similar.  Look at command undead; it's a second level spell that is a duplicate of charm monster.  The 12 point difference in the kernel analysis is largely made up by the save DC difference (4 points in kernel currency) In fact, I bet the only difference between them (beside a bit of heightening) is the "sweeping flexibility" factor.  But if there is an undead resistance to being controlled or commanded, it is maybe 4 points.  Maybe only +2.  A spell that bypasses all forms of specific resistance to mind affecting spells (undead, mindless, construct, plant) shouldn't need much more than +8 SP.[/sblock]It still seems a bit procrustean to me, but I am delighted to see that the f-word is no longer a vulgarity!This is still a multiplicative factor, though a smaller one, and one that is concealed mechanically.  But still.  Why not just drop it as an impromptu factor?  Isn't eight enough?[edit] 50% might work.  Even with Herald of the Eschaton.  And it's certainly better than requiring them to work out suites ahead of time, or allowing them to waste hours tinkering with their spells at the table. [edit]Epic wizards get 8 feats in 12 levels.  If a krustean wizard spends them all on Automatic Metamagic Capacity (after getting IM), he can add four more Empower Spell feats to his energy drain spell.  Four halves is twice the base value, and energy drain drains 2d4 (average 5) levels as its base value, so this would add 10 to the number of levels drained (LD).Say a jacobean wizard is also working on his epic energy drain, and he's picking up AMC feats as well.  Each AMC is worth a -2 mitigation, so in those 12 levels he gains 28 more spell points to play with.  So 10 LD = 28 SP, and I am approximating it as 1 LD = 3 SP.  To make the beginning value come out right (5 at SP 24) I set the formula as SP = 9 + 3 * levels drained.  8 levels at SP 33.  But really the formula should be SP = 10 + 2.8 * LD; 8.2 levels at SP 33.Say you have a save for half and targets save 50% of the time.  Then the expected value is the average of 0.5 and 1; 0.75.  Multiply the factor (2.8) times 0.75 and get 2.1.  Round it down to 2 and assuming that 1 negative level = -1 CR you get that -1CR = +2SP formula.  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid    :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" />  Specifically you getSP = 9 + 2 * LDAt SP 33 you do 12 levels, 6 on a successful save.I don't know if this is any better.  But tying this mechanic to saves could only work if saves work properly at epic levels.  And I am rather of the opposite opinion.  :\</blockquote>

Verification