Epic Spell Question

[kreynolds]

I agree. The concept was equaled to upgrading a magic weapon. After you upgraded the weapon, you don't have the old version any more. So it should be with the epic spell.

That's not what I meant, actually. While I agree that once you upgrade the spell, you no longer have the older lower power spell, that wasn't what I was addressing.

I was thinking of this scenario: You have a +3 weapon, and you get it upgraded to a +5. Do you pay the full cost of a +5 weapon? Nope. You only pay the difference between the two.

Now, for about 10 seconds there, I was kicking around this house rule scenario: You have an epic spell that deals 40d6 points of fire damage. You want to create a new spell, identical to the first, but with the exception that it deals 60d6 instead of 40d6. Do you pay the full cost of the 60d6 spell? No. You pay the difference. After all, the majority of your research was done on the previous spell, so you can just apply about 70% to 80% of what you previously learned by creating the original spell.

Anyways, that's what I was talking about, and kicking around, for about 10 seconds.

 

[Anubis]

I dunno . . .

My thoght is that although it is researched like a magic weapon, it still BEHAVES like a spell.

All the other spells with damage dice, generally speaking, can be lowered in power at the time of casting. Not that anyone would ever really WANT to lower the power, at least I haven't found any reason to ever do that, but the idea would be that the option is there.

I would think if you know how to cat a more powerful spell, you could cast less powerful versions of the same spell no matter what kinda spell it is.

In such a case, wouldn't it make sense to allow it, especially considering it would rarely happen, if ever, because I've never seen a caster lower the powr of his own spell? Not like it would be broken or unbalance to allow someone to use a weaker version of the spell.

Get what I'm saying? That's the idea that I was having . . . When put that way, what do you think?

 

[CRGreathouse]

Get what I'm saying? That's the idea that I was having . . . When put that way, what do you think?

If a Wiz15 chooses to cast fireball with caster level 5 instead of 15, it would still be a 3rd level spell. Thus, I wouldn't let you reduce the Spellcraft DC for the epic spell.

 

[kreynolds]

Get what I'm saying? That's the idea that I was having . . . When put that way, what do you think?

I get what you're saying, but look at it like this. An epic spell is just a really bada$$ scroll. Most of the parameters are locked and set in stone once your research is complete. Like a scroll, you can pick your targets, and even change your targets, if the spell allows it. Epic spells don't have the flexibility that normal spells do, probably because their so powerful.

 

[Xeriar]

If a Wiz15 chooses to cast fireball with caster level 5 instead of 15, it would still be a 3rd level spell. Thus, I wouldn't let you reduce the Spellcraft DC for the epic spell.

I might go with this philosophy for a sorcerer, or even a cleric, druid or psion, but something about it doesn't jive with the wizard for me.

Probably has the most to do with the idea that, why would -they- of all people have forgotten how to memorize the original varient?

More importantly, though, what does it break? In most cases the idea is useless - no reason to cast the +40 version of Epic Dispelling when you have anything higher.

I just don't see what the issue is involving keeping the older spell.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

I dunno . . .

My thoght is that although it is researched like a magic weapon, it still BEHAVES like a spell.

I wouldn't say so. Epic spells are a little different from normal spells. They have to be developed with a certain power level in mind, and once you have created them, they won't change. And your caster level doesn't affekt the spell at all. The only aspect of your level that affekts the spell is your Spellcraft bonus, which only determines whether you can cast the spell or not (or maybe if it's risky to do so), it won't change anything else about the spell.

In order to change the spell, you have to remake it. As I have said, it would be alright if you "upgraded" the spell, but that would mean the old one is gone. If it weren't, you would get two spells for the price of one - say, you have a spell that costs you 50.000 to research, and you upgrade it to one that costs 70.000, you only pay the other 20.000 and have the 70k-spell. If you would keep the old one, you'd have 120.000 worth of spells and paid only 70.000!
On the other side, it could be argumented that you haven't "deleted" the old scroll but merely used it as a blueprint in the creation of the new one. But it's probably similar to a scroll: if you learn a normal spell from a scroll, the scroll is consumed in the process.

In the end, I could live with the rule that you can use the power level the spell used in a former incarnation, but It won't lower the Spellcraft DC!

 

[Anubis]

Hmmm . . . Prehaps . . .

Honestly, though, that part was just a side note. It really is a moot point because the situation would be rare indeed.