Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sepulchrave II" data-source="post: 3150072" data-attributes="member: 4303">I'd rather not rewrite anything core unless we absolutely have to - I'm not counting epic stuff in that definition, obviously. Hence my suggestion for a feat - it becomes a plug-in rule, rather than a revision of an existing nonepic spell.Presenting an alternative to Mordenkainen's disjunction, reaving dispel and chain dispel at the caster's option - single target, no caster level cap, 9th level - does not require that disjunction be removed from the game. I think we should keep it, if only for purposes of the esoteric seed: it's just too tempting. It's whacked out, for sure. DMs know this. They can ban it by themselves.But what kind of mages would we have if disjunction were a common weapon? It's an interesting thought. If every epic mage were throwing out quickened disjunctions, the 'naked' wizard would need to be viable. The [ward] seed can be keyed to a [disjunction] - jacobeans would get to keep their toys. And if [reflect] can be factored to turn area effects, it could get pretty messy.  I think an epic feat which removed the caster level cap on GDM and gave a +4 (or higher) bonus to dispel checks would be viable. I agree the problem is more fundamental, though. **Wrote the above last night and subsequently changed my mind - I've swung back and forth a lot on this issue. Too many high-end spells need to be modified or removed for a smooth transition into epic play - blasphemy, disjunction, shapechange, poly any object, gate (1 target) are the big ones. I suspect that they might only be notionally balanced as esoteric seeds, in fact. Maybe true resurrection should be esoteric, also.If we limit the caster level to 20 except for spells which otherwise specify a cap (like polar ray at 25d6) then it solves the blasphemy/holy word problem; maybe gate should have a similar caveat regarding its single-target application - the proviso for deities (reluctant or not) might be better moved to miracle - that way it's unambiguously the DM's responsibility. I would suggest a 25HD cap for gate - it brings a solar and some low-epic monsters into the range of sub-epic characters, but nothing too crazy. If we add a template +1CR = +2 effective HD line, it also prevents pseudonatural madness.Which means I have to for true res as well.How do you feel about 25HD and 1000 XP for gate, shapechange and true resurrection - or should we just ban shapechange altogether and adopt the new [polymorph] subschool only? I like that. We should snag it.</blockquote>

Verification