Epic Spellcasting

As to fixing the current system, here are some of my thoughts from way back when. First of all, basing it on spellcraft harms non-wizards in more than one way. Most other classes don't have a lot of ranks per level, and may not have maxed out spellcraft, expecially since concentration is more important to lower level casters. This brings in a discontinuity. Up to 20th level, the dumb cleric is as good at casting spells as the smart cleric. At epic levels, he's suddenly a lot worse. I would suggest a caster level check with the key spellcasting ability modifier added in. This would only require minor adjustments in the seed costs. As to the seed costs, they should be based on an archetypal spell. This should include area of effect, duration, casting time, etc. Either the base seed should include those, or the cost should be lowered to reflect what they were. Then if some effect based on that seed is associated with a longer casting time or whatever, that should be reflected in a higher cost for the effect. Note that each seed cost includes 10 (or 11?) points for the expected value of the d20 roll. When combining seeds, you should at the minimum subtract that off. Also, the development costs are often ludicrous when compared to expected character wealth. After any modifications are done to the system, that should definately be reexamined. You should be able to get at least one spell per level without leaving the game for five months and bankrupting yourself.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

ichabod said:
If casters can whomp fighters in combat, what do you need fighters for? I mean, when would you rather have a fighter and a wizard instead of two wizards?
Read the section of my post you quoted, ichabod! The fact is that PvP doesn't always translate to side-by-side party viability. The reason you want a fighter and a wizard instead of two wizards is that you need a balance of adventuring assets. Just because one set of assets can beat the other in a PvP scenario doesn't mean that the second set isn't useful. Fighters last longer and can function better in melee situations than a caster; that's very useful. Likewise, a fighter is terrifically useful against spell-resistant creatures or in an AMF. It's just that in an arena setting, a wizard is more likely to dash off a spell or spell combo that will destroy the fighter right away, as well as protect himself against the fighter's attacks.
 

ruleslawyer said:
Read the section of my post you quoted, ichabod! The fact is that PvP doesn't always translate to side-by-side party viability. The reason you want a fighter and a wizard instead of two wizards is that you need a balance of adventuring assets. Just because one set of assets can beat the other in a PvP scenario doesn't mean that the second set isn't useful. Fighters last longer and can function better in melee situations than a caster; that's very useful. Likewise, a fighter is terrifically useful against spell-resistant creatures or in an AMF. It's just that in an arena setting, a wizard is more likely to dash off a spell or spell combo that will destroy the fighter right away, as well as protect himself against the fighter's attacks.

And I still don't understand what (beside the 10 foot radius AMF) you would need a fighter for when you have something that can beat the fighter without taking a single hit point of damage. What can the fighter stand up to that you can't destroy with that level of power, or deal with by summoning something (given that you are so powerful)? I still say it's unbalanced.
 

Let's not get side-tracked, fellows! Let's leave the question about whether high level fighters are redundant for another thread, Ok? :)

---

I think before going into details about tinkering with epic spells is what DCs are appropriate for different character levels, what kinds of spell effects correspond to these DCs.

By "appropriate to a character level" I mean to include anything that will boost a character's capacity to cast epic spells, or that mitigates their cost.

Sepulchrave implicitly addresses this issue in his suggestion that the Epic Spellcasting Score be simply ranks in spellcraft plus the appropriate ability modifier. I.e. no feats, no items of +30 spellcraft. The next question would be what kind of ability boosting items and spells there are. In non-epic play you can have a +6 enhancement bonus and a +5 inherent bonus. Can you customize items and spells to get luck bonuses, insight bonuses, profane bonuses and/or circumstance bonuses to the relevant ability score? I would say no.

Similarly the mitigating factors for epic spells need to be scrutinized, especially the contributions by secondary casters. Especially simulacrums and cohorts.
 

Similarly the mitigating factors for epic spells need to be scrutinized, especially the contributions by secondary casters. Especially simulacrums and cohorts.

Ritual casting is a big problem. One of the characters in my campaign suggested summoning a slew of Immoths with multiple summon monster IX spells and deploying them in a ritual context. I said 'no,' but justifying it is difficult. Gating a bunch of Trumpet Archons or Planetars would also be a possibility. A 22nd-level Wizard can easily open 3-4 gates, scrolls notwithstanding. Whilst its possible to have in-game rationales for barring this kind of activity, there is no mechanical obstacle.

Unless you insist that all participants in an epic ritual possess the Cooperative Spell feat from T&B. :D Burning a feat to accomplish ritual spells actually seems quite reasonable to me - especially if epic spells become the raison d'être of epic casters, which I really believe they should be.

I think it could be argued that, technically, you cannot have a mixed group of spell levels contributed at present: i.e. you could have 6 casters contributing 5th level slots, or 6 casters contributing 4th level slots; but you can't have 3 of each. This is nonsensical, of course. There should simply be a number of spell levels contributed --> mitigating factor relationship.

I don't think it should be linear, either. Maybe something like this:


Spell Levels Contributed................-DC

1......................................................-1
3......................................................-2
6......................................................-3
10....................................................-4
15....................................................-5
21....................................................-6
28....................................................-7
36....................................................-8
45....................................................-9
55....................................................-10

etc.

The bigger the ritual, the more 'inefficient' it becomes - perhaps a feat ('Ritual Expert' or something) could be devised to allow a caster to more effectively use rituals as mitigators.

Although this is wildly at odds with the way things work at present, each point of mitigatation should actually mean something. Also, we're talking about a much 'tighter' range of power at level X, because of no Epic Skill Focus (Spellcraft) or +umpteen amulets of Spellcraft.

And I do believe that Spellcraft should still be important. If its based on caster level, then multiclass casters get shafted again.


***
I think before going into details about tinkering with epic spells is what DCs are appropriate for different character levels, what kinds of spell effects correspond to these DCs.

This is really tricky, and depends on what you consider to be the realistic 'upper end' of Epic Levels. 40? 60? 100!!? I'm inclined to say 40-50. Characters ought to be thinking about deification after that.

I think (rituals notwithstanding):

* A 25th level Wizard should be able to kill a target of less than CR 20 with a passing thought most of the time (momento mori style).

* A 30th level Cleric should be able to animate a reasonable army of undead - say 5000 zombies and skeletons. And control them.

*A 30th level Enchanter (or Necromancer) should be able to afflict a dynasty with a curse such that the first-born son of every marriage dies before the age of 3.

*A 30th level Conjurer should have a decent chance of binding an archdevil or demon prince.

*A 40th level Transmuter should be capable of being in two places at once.

*A 50th-level Psi-Savant should be able to draw plasma from the sun's corona, pull it across space at half the speed of light, and flatten a city with it. With effort.


How about Vile stuff? Any ideas?
 

Sepulchrave II said:
And I do believe that Spellcraft should still be important. If its based on caster level, then multiclass casters get shafted again.

I'm confused. Why shouldn't they be shafted in this context? (I agree they have other problems in epic) If they've been spending levels on non-caster classes, they don't have access to higher level spells and having worse access to epic spells follows from that. If they've split between divine and arcane, you get the same thing, just with two different types of magic. If they've been getting + spell casting levels from prestige classes, those would presumably count in to caster level for epic casting. If they haven't gotten a full 20 spell caster levels with their prestige class, then that was the trade off for taking that prestige class. All of that seems more reasonable than saying wizards are just better at epic magic than everyone else, and better balanced than shafting everyone but wizards.

Or did I miss something?
 

Why shouldn't they be shafted in this context? ... All of that seems more reasonable than saying wizards are just better at epic magic than everyone else, and better balanced than shafting everyone but wizards.

You've got a point. I'm thinking specifically of wiz/cleric, wiz/druid etc. combos; I guess its hard for me to accept the fact that there are clerics out there with an Int of 8, and they can't afford to sink skill ranks into Spellcraft. Don't get me wrong - I'm sure there are, and any overhaul of the system should probably account for them.

But the Wiz 20/ Cleric 15 would at least get some breaks in the spellcasting arena if Epic Spells weren't based on caster level. None of their nonepic spells will have any punch against most CR 30+ monsters, and even with Epic Spells they'd have to use factors to penetrate SR.

What would your prereqs for Epic Spellcasting be - as simple as caster level 21?


Another, more general question: how do you see the number of Epic Spells per day progressing? At the moment, its basically 2 (if you're level 21-26); 3 (if you're level 27-36); 4 (37-46) etc. This is kind of bland and unsatisfactory, although I don't have any suggestions about what to do about it.
 

To cast Epic Spells I think you should have to be able to cast 9th level spells.

To help multi-classed spellcasters, make the ESS (epic spellcasting score) equal to their total of all their effective spellcaster level in all their classes. So a Wiz 20/Cleric 15 would have an ESS of 35, a Paladin 12/Sorcerer 18 would have an ESS of 24, and so on.

The prereq for Epic Spellcasting could then be an ESS of 21.

Making it based on effective caster level removes most magic items and feats from the equation. It automatically disqualifies skill focus: spellcraft and amulets of +X to spellcraft. Things that increase effective caster level are rare, and seem appropriate to improve Epic Spellcasting. The spellpower ability of an Archmage or Hierophant, for example. Or the +1 from a death knell, or from having the appropriate domain (clerics with the Good and Law domains have +2 to their ESS when casting spells with those descriptors).

I'd be inclined to have a spell seed cost as much as the corresponding spell, and have it cost "essence" to cast. Each point of essence spent reduces your ESS by one. A death seed costs 7 essence, for instance.

An easy use of epic spellcasting could be simply to reproduce any other spell in the PHB (like the duplicate spell effect of Wish). From another spell list is +2 essence if it is from a prohibited list, and +1 essence if it is from a prohibited school. If the duplicated spell has an xp cost, you generally have to pay it, but increasing the essence cost by +1 reduces the xp cost by 100 xp.

So a wizard can use an epic spell to reproduce a limited wish (with no xp cost) at the cost of 10 essence; 7 essence for a 7th level spell, and 3 to mitigate the 300 xp cost.

These spells would be duplicated as if by a 20th level caster, but spending more essence could increase the caster level.
 

Cheiromancer said:
To cast Epic Spells I think you should have to be able to cast 9th level spells.

To help multi-classed spellcasters, make the ESS (epic spellcasting score) equal to their total of all their effective spellcaster level in all their classes. So a Wiz 20/Cleric 15 would have an ESS of 35, a Paladin 12/Sorcerer 18 would have an ESS of 24, and so on.

The prereq for Epic Spellcasting could then be an ESS of 21.


Hmm, I dunno. It seems kind of clunky. If the Epic Spellcasting Score is a function of the Epic Spellcasting feat (c.f. Leadership), then it's kind of nonsensical to have it as a prereq. for the feat itself - kind of like saying you have to have a Leadership score of 6 in order to qualify for the Leadership feat.

I'm actually leaning toward ichabod's position, and just base it on caster level. We can think of a patch for multiclassed casters afterwards - in the usual tradition of the game :rolleyes:

Cheiromancer said:
Making it based on effective caster level removes most magic items and feats from the equation. It automatically disqualifies skill focus: spellcraft and amulets of +X to spellcraft. Things that increase effective caster level are rare, and seem appropriate to improve Epic Spellcasting. The spellpower ability of an Archmage or Hierophant, for example. Or the +1 from a death knell, or from having the appropriate domain (clerics with the Good and Law domains have +2 to their ESS when casting spells with those descriptors).

I like that. What about the rod of the epic spellcaster? The full +10 will be very weighty - maybe that's appropriate.

Cheiromancer said:
I'd be inclined to have a spell seed cost as much as the corresponding spell, and have it cost "essence" to cast. Each point of essence spent reduces your ESS by one. A death seed costs 7 essence, for instance.

Getting close to a spell-point system here. Not that I'm necessarily averse.

But I agree that keeping the numbers low might be beneficial - you can keep the final DCs 'tighter.'

Bear in mind also that if the amulet +30 and Epic Skill Focus (Spellcraft) route is allowed in the current system, a 25th level wizard can be casting spells with a DC in the 70s.

Which is to say (for example) slay (25) + destroy (29 [why?]) +contact (23) for a total of 77.


In the revised system, the level 25 wizard will have an ESS of, say, 37 (caster level + relevant ability modifier). But the same seeds will cost less - slay (7) + destroy (6? surely it should be based on disintegrate) + contact (5) for a total of 18.

If your 'Essence' mechanic were employed, then he could cast two such spells in a day - actually it seems far more elegant than the current system, and much more flexible. At least at first glance. Heaven knows whether it could be balanced.

It also becomes impractical to cast epic buffs in order to pump your Int (and ESS) up - if your essence is expended in casting the spell. There is a built-in safeguard against using a buff to subsequently cast a more powerful epic spell.
 

How about factors?

If we're dealing with smaller numbers, then these need to be changed to accomodate. There is already a correlation with spell level as far as the seeds go - slay is 7 etc. Equivalent metamagics are easy to work out:

No verbal component: +1 (silent)
No somatic component: +1 (still)
Increase spell's save DC by +1: +1 (heightened)
Increase range by 100%: +1 (enlarged)
Increase duration by 100%: +1 (extended)
Increase area by 100%: +3 (widened)

Assuming that a base casting time of 1 minute is retained for all epic spells, I'd also tentatively suggest the following:

Reduce casting time to 1 round: +4
Reduce casting time to 1 action: +5
Quickened spell: +8 (quickened from 1 action)
Add extra target: +4 (twinned? split ray seems more appropriate, though)
Gain +1 on caster level check: +1 (applies to both overcoming SR and beating foe's dispel effect.)
Increase damage die by one step: +2 (empowered. kind of. I'm pretty dubious about this one)
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top