NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cheiromancer" data-source="post: 3133586" data-attributes="member: 141">I had envisaged the flexibility of [blast] as including whether the effect was a line or a spherical spread, not just what element was involved.  I am also wondering why I priced aligned damage as the same as typeless damage.  It is better against certain kinds of opponents (those of the opposed alignment and those vulnerable to that type of energy) but is never worse.  It should probably have a +10 cost.Re: [destroy]. If you follow the precedent of disintegrate, any creature or object reduced to 0 hit points should be entirely disintegrated.  Not -10 hp.  You also give unattended magical items a save to negate the effect, which I don't see in disintegrate.  I would move the sentence noting the effect of [destroy] on force fields to the Special area.  Just so that people will hesitate a little whether to weaken the spell to just a damaging spell instead of a magical-obstacle-removing spell.Regarding USP - in some seeds I think we inflated some parameters knowing that in most cases the spellcaster would use mitigating factors to buy them back at no net cost.  These kind of "break even" transactions shouldn't be penalized by an unusually high USP.  For example, if we were unsure whether [polymorph] should have a swift action casting time (+4) that lasts 20 rounds, or a standard action casting timel that lasts 200 minutes (+4), we would probably choose the latter, knowing that the factors could be exchanged at no net cost.  Which implies that the USP shouldn't change either, which means the reducing factor has to affect the USP as well.I like the idea that the base seed determines the school, but that descriptors are inherited from other seeds.  The [Epic] tag is redundant. I think, for issues of space, that USP should be on the same line as the Spellcraft Prerequisite. When range and area factors differ, the cheapest factor of the two seeds should be inherited.  I wonder if it would be worth mitigating the other seed down to match area, range and duration before halving the seed?  If these values are different because of no cost buyback considerations, they shouldn't result in a penalty.I price creature => area as +6.  (for a 120-ft. line or a 20-ft. spread) Personal => area requires purchasing range in addition to this factor, and if you want to make it selective add +6 (for beneficial spells this will also allow creatures to leave the area without losing the benefit).  So your spells should be 6 SP cheaper.My intuition tells me that the effect of destroying fire should be approximately as follows:Destroying fire erupts in a 20-ft radius burst which you designate within range. Creatures caught within the blast suffer 65d6 of fire damage. A successful Reflex saving throw reduces the damage to one quarter. A creature or object which is reduced to 0 or fewer hit points is utterly destroyed, as if disintegrated.Whereas fiery destruction might readFiery destruction erupts in a 20-ft radius spread which you designate within range. Creatures caught within the blast suffer 65d6 of fiery destructive damage; fire resistance or immunity does not apply, but creatures vulnerable to fire take half again as much damage. Unattended objects also take this damage. A successful Reflex saving throw reduces the damage to one eighth. A creature or object which is reduced to 0 or fewer hit points is utterly destroyed, as if disintegrated. Fiery destruction affects magical matter, energy fields, and force effects that are normally only affected by the disintegrate spell: such effects are automatically destroyed. A prismatic wall, prismatic sphere, an antimagic shell, or epic spells incorporating the [ward] seed may also be destroyed if the caster succeeds at an opposed caster level check.  This check is made with a -4 penalty.Non-selective area effects should have reflex saves.  Special effects (like disintegrating things, and being effectively typeless) should be based on the base spell.  A little bit of flavor from the other seed should still be present (getting disintegrated, doing more damage against fire vulnerable creatures).  It's hard to explain the saves, except to say that destroying fire is nearer to half, and fiery destruction is closer to 5d6.  If a save negates spell is combined with a save half spell, the result should be a save partial, I think.  Or you could add or subtract a bit elsewhere to make it fit better.How does that sound?*****If you can compound different flavors of [blast], (acid + electricity + fire + sonic) why not fire + fire + fire +fire?  Do you allow multiples of the same energy enhancement on a weapon?  I.e. a quadruply flaming longsword +1 that does +4d6 fire damage?  And shouldn't you halve the "set to X" factors- each of those +25d6s is essentially costing only +8 SP.  Even at +10 SP that's like having an Empower for +5 SP.  Even at my most permissive I wasn't advocating that.  But your smiley indicates you aren't too happy with it either.</blockquote>

Verification