Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Hosted Publisher Forums
Dog Soul Hosted Forum
Epic Magic Big Thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Sepulchrave II" data-source="post: 3134375" data-attributes="member: 4303"><p>I hope a solution to rays is within sight - the original ELH costed the change from a targeted to a ray effect at +4 DC, and automatically replaced the save w/ a ranged touch attack. Given the reliability of ranged touch attacks at these levels, it was a no-brainer for most spells.</p><p></p><p>Maybe rays should be restricted to [blast], [harrow] and [destroy] no matter what. With x2 USP on a no-save version which would normally prompt a save. They're not 100% fool-proof (ranged touch), even then. And I think that no-save spells should be restricted to rays - barring esoterica such as <em>power word</em> and <em>blasphemy</em>. If a feat were required to unlock the potential of these esoteric seeds, we could be pretty generous about provisions within them.</p><p></p><p>I see what you're saying about the order of operations in [blast]. Let's go with +2d6/+1SP (it only took me a month to get there!). We could use one of your suggested techniques to limit access to the exponential factor:</p><p></p><p>e.g. <em>Factor (restricted)</em>: If you have 30 or more ranks in Spellcraft, you may empower a spell develpoed with this seed to deal 50% more damage than the base damage. Increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +8. This factor stacks.</p><p></p><p>C.f. a suggested general ruling regarding seed combinations, maybe implied rather than explicit (I don't remember):</p><p></p><p><em>A compound spell has a minimum Spellcraft Prerequisite of 24 plus 6 for each additional seed which it contains beyond the first.</em></p><p></p><p>There is a resonance here. Level 27 becomes a definite break-point. As it does for the pure AMC caster: 5 free metamagic levels is equal to empower+maximize any spell at will.</p><p></p><p>If level 33 becomes the next break-point, and it does - AMC-man can now automaxempowerquicken his spells, access to a 3rd seed in a spell is gained for the jacobean - then another technique could be added to [blast]:</p><p></p><p><em>Factor (restricted):</em> If you have 36 or more ranks in Spellcraft, you may maximize spells with this seed so that each die of damage deals maximum damage. To maximize a spell developed with [blast], increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +12. Each additional 100% of the base damage increases the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +12.</p><p></p><p>I also think we should remove the cumulative +3 Spellcraft Prerequisite from the basic feats. I sense they are sufficiently balanced without. Assuming AMC is OK.</p><p></p><p>Sorry it's taken so long for me to reach here, I needed multiple points of corroboration. I think we should apply special scrutiny every 6th level above 21st, to determine balance issues. We can engineer a lot of mechanics to bring things back into line (or a measured distance ahead of it) with regard to the AMC curve: namely access to exponential or special factors, and access to feats with Spellcraft Prerequisites of 30, 36 and 42.</p><p></p><p>Hopefully we can keep the seed generalist, the seed specialist and the metamagic specialist all on the same page.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Sepulchrave II, post: 3134375, member: 4303"] I hope a solution to rays is within sight - the original ELH costed the change from a targeted to a ray effect at +4 DC, and automatically replaced the save w/ a ranged touch attack. Given the reliability of ranged touch attacks at these levels, it was a no-brainer for most spells. Maybe rays should be restricted to [blast], [harrow] and [destroy] no matter what. With x2 USP on a no-save version which would normally prompt a save. They're not 100% fool-proof (ranged touch), even then. And I think that no-save spells should be restricted to rays - barring esoterica such as [I]power word[/I] and [I]blasphemy[/I]. If a feat were required to unlock the potential of these esoteric seeds, we could be pretty generous about provisions within them. I see what you're saying about the order of operations in [blast]. Let's go with +2d6/+1SP (it only took me a month to get there!). We could use one of your suggested techniques to limit access to the exponential factor: e.g. [I]Factor (restricted)[/I]: If you have 30 or more ranks in Spellcraft, you may empower a spell develpoed with this seed to deal 50% more damage than the base damage. Increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +8. This factor stacks. C.f. a suggested general ruling regarding seed combinations, maybe implied rather than explicit (I don't remember): [I]A compound spell has a minimum Spellcraft Prerequisite of 24 plus 6 for each additional seed which it contains beyond the first.[/I] There is a resonance here. Level 27 becomes a definite break-point. As it does for the pure AMC caster: 5 free metamagic levels is equal to empower+maximize any spell at will. If level 33 becomes the next break-point, and it does - AMC-man can now automaxempowerquicken his spells, access to a 3rd seed in a spell is gained for the jacobean - then another technique could be added to [blast]: [I]Factor (restricted):[/I] If you have 36 or more ranks in Spellcraft, you may maximize spells with this seed so that each die of damage deals maximum damage. To maximize a spell developed with [blast], increase the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +12. Each additional 100% of the base damage increases the Spellcraft Prerequisite by +12. I also think we should remove the cumulative +3 Spellcraft Prerequisite from the basic feats. I sense they are sufficiently balanced without. Assuming AMC is OK. Sorry it's taken so long for me to reach here, I needed multiple points of corroboration. I think we should apply special scrutiny every 6th level above 21st, to determine balance issues. We can engineer a lot of mechanics to bring things back into line (or a measured distance ahead of it) with regard to the AMC curve: namely access to exponential or special factors, and access to feats with Spellcraft Prerequisites of 30, 36 and 42. Hopefully we can keep the seed generalist, the seed specialist and the metamagic specialist all on the same page. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
Archive Forums
Hosted Forums
Personal & Hosted Forums
Hosted Publisher Forums
Dog Soul Hosted Forum
Epic Magic Big Thread
Top