Greater Dispell Magic

[Shin Okada]

Ah and there's my point ... you COULDNT have a +25 bc of the cap.

Chain Dispel's cap is +25, not +20.

It seems an odd question, but how many 3rd level slots (1d20 +10 max) does your very knowledgeable Mage expand before deciding random chance is working against him and perhaps he needs to devote a little more thought into undoing this particular enchantment and start expending his 6th level spell slots (1d20 +20 max) since he's unaware of the difference per-se (in character vs game mechanic knowledge)

The answer is, a very knowledgeable mage who can cast better version of dispelling spell never dare to use the 3rd-level Dispel Magic from the beginning. Especially in a combat.

Sorcerers and Beguilers have plentiful of spell slots to burn. So they just use their best dispelling spell. In case of a Wizard, he should create and carry scrolls of his best dispelling spells at his caster level, or use a staff with better dispel spells.

Seriously, at higher level campaign, lower level spell slots are rarely used, or only used for certain spells which does not have save and caster level cap (say,True Casting, Haste and such). You have enough higher level slots and/or magic items to fight the day. And you should not expect that your lower level spell slots are very effective in combat.

By the way, if you really want to know the strength of the magic you are trying to dispel, Spellcraft check or Arcane Sight and similar spells will at least reveal what the spell is, thus, the minimum caster level expected. I mean, when you see the opponent is under the effect of Shapechange, which is 9th-level spell, you should expect that the caster level is at least 17th. Though there always be exceptions. Arcane Sight also reveals relative strength of the magic aura.

 

[jefgorbach]

Chaining GDM makes its 9th level spell with greatly increased odds of success by providing upto 21 targeting attempts per casting, however re-reading the metamagic feat's description indicates the first attempt would still be at 1d20+max 20CL with each additional attempt at 1d20+max 16CL.
How are you getting +25?

Maximizing it instead (9th level) simply guarantees 20+max 20cl on check.

Some GMs allow Empowering it (8th level) to make the roll 1d20 + half rolled, + max 20cl ....however google implies the consensus is the 1d20 roll isnt one of the spell's variables (AOE, casting time, duration, range, damage) so shouldnt be affected by Empower.




Personally I dont see 6th level GDM used frequently in combat bc minions are rarely buffed sufficiently to warrant the effort prior to their execution and an Archmage gets far better results by freely sculpting an 8th anti-magic field around the big boss to leave an unprotected gap for follow-up spells.

------------------------------
"CHAIN SPELL [METAMAGIC] (Complete Arcane, p76
You can cast spells that arc to other targets in addition to the primary target.
Prerequisite: Any metamagic feat.
Benefit: Any spell that specifies a single target and has a range greater than touch can be chained so as to affect that primary target normally, then arc to a number of secondary targets equal to your caster level (maximum 20). Each arc affects one secondary target chosen
by you, all of which must be within 30 feet of the primary target, and none of which can be affected more than once. You can choose to affect fewer secondary targets than the maximum.

If the chained spell deals damage, the secondary targets each take half as much damage
as the primary target (rounded down) and can attempt Reflex saving throws for half damage (whether the spell allows the original target a save or not).

For spells that don’t deal damage, the save DCs against arcing effects are reduced by 4.

For example, if a 10th-level wizard normally casts cause fear at DC 14, a chained cause
fear could target a goblin chieftain at DC 14 and up to ten of his nearby guards at DC 10.

A chained spell uses up a spell slot three levels higher than the spell’s actual level."


"Empower Spell [MetaMagic]
Benefit: All variable, numeric effects of an empowered spell are increased by one-half.
Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables.
An empowered spell uses up a spell slot two levels higher than the spell’s actual level."

"Maximize Spell [MetaMagic]
Benefit: All variable, numeric effects of a spell modified by this feat are maximized. Saving throws and opposed rolls are not affected, nor are spells without random variables. A maximized spell uses up a spell slot three levels higher than the spell’s actual level.
An empowered, maximized spell gains the separate benefits of each feat: the maximum result plus one-half the normally rolled result.

 

[Shin Okada]

Chaining GDM makes its 9th level spell with greatly increased odds of success by providing upto 21 targeting attempts per casting, however re-reading the metamagic feat's description indicates the first attempt would still be at 1d20+max 20CL with each additional attempt at 1d20+max 16CL.
How are you getting +25?

No, no! I am not talking about metamagic feat. Chain Dispel is a 8th-level Sor/Wiz spell in PHB II. This spell can only target creatures. But can target multiple creatures at the same time. Great for de-buffing.

 

[jefgorbach]

No, no! I am not talking about metamagic feat. Chain Dispel is a 8th-level Sor/Wiz spell in PHB II. This spell can only target creatures. But can target multiple creatures at the same time. Great for de-buffing.

Doh, completely forgot about THAT one.

It states "Each creature struck by this spell is affected as if by a targeted dispel magic, except that you can add your caster level to the dispel check, up to a maximum of 25." so I dont see why you couldnt specify the creature's armors, weapons, etc in addition to any existing spell effects as per normal.

 

[Malachei]

Chain Dispel's cap is +25, not +20.

Yes, but that delays the issue for just 5 levels.

IMO, as caster level continues to increase, so should the bonus to dispel checks. If not for Greater Dispel Magic, then at least for the higher-level variants (such as Chain Dispel -- it's an 8th level spell). Otherwise, these spells fade to uselessness in epic play.

 

[Shin Okada]

Yes, but that delays the issue for just 5 levels.

IMO, as caster level continues to increase, so should the bonus to dispel checks. If not for Greater Dispel Magic, then at least for the higher-level variants (such as Chain Dispel -- it's an 8th level spell). Otherwise, these spells fade to uselessness in epic play.

That is why I have suggested to make upgraded version of dispelling spells when playing an epic campaign. They can have 10th+ spell level slots with Improved Spell Capacity feat.

And, IMHO most of the lower level spells SHOULD fade to uselessness occasionally, even before hitting epic. And I guess 3.Xe were designed so.

Sleep becomes useless after, say, L4-5. Even though there is no level cap, non-highetened Color Spray or Grease become less and less useful due to low DC. Thus, as the PCs level-up, lower level spell slots become less and less important and become rarely used in combat. It is either filled with utility spells (Identify) or some breakfast spells which spell level is not so important (Mage Armor) or just kept open. Or jut be forgotten in case of non-preparation casters.

If most of the 1st-level spells are still viable combat options when PCs are hitting level 20th, players will be overwhelmed by the vast options available, and the game will be slowed down seriously.

 

[Malachei]

I agree for low-level-spells, but, I don't think that mid- and high-level spells should be fade to uselessness for several reasons:

First, Greater Dispel Magic is a 6th level spell. As spells in the top third levels make up most of the punch a character can make even in epic levels, they should still remain useful. Improved Spell Capacity gives you a single spell slot (plus bonus spells) of a higher level, so you will need your 6th to 9th level spells for a long time. Also, Improved Spell Capacity is an optional choice, while Dispelling is a core game element, IMO.

Second, there are a lot of spells that are not capped and/or are still useful at high levels. Capping makes sense most often if one progression outruns the other. Damage-spells are capped mainly because they could be unbalanced at higher levels, with damage outrunning hit points -- especially for those monsters, NPCs and PCs with lower hit points per hit die, due to class or CON score. I don't think it makes sense if your caster level increases, but your ability to dispel does not. Also, some monsters are using Greater Dispel as a SLA.

Of course, it is possible to research obscure Dispel variants. I agree that genuine spells of 10th level and above are a fine idea, leaving those spell slots not only to metamagically enhanced spells. However, I think the core game should take care of an important game mechanic like this in a better way.

 

[Shin Okada]

However, I think the core game should take care of an important game mechanic like this in a better way.

3.Xe core rules have never truly took care of epic campaigns anyway. And only 3.0e had Epic Level Handbook (there wasn't one for 3.5e, you must rely on SRD for the most part). And of course, many of the materials (classes, spells etc.) shown in various supplements were not covered by epic rules. 3.Xe epic were something you need to do a lot of homeworks by yourself.

Edit: Regarding caps on dispelling spells.

In my experience, a dispelling spell can easily be the strongest spell. It can strip off all the buffs from your enemy. It can deactivate magical traps. And it can counter any spell, if you can only make CL check. So, IMHO, like damaging spells have dice cap, dispelling spells should have CL cap. If there is no CL cap in the 3rd-level Dispel Magic, that 3rd-level spell can be the most useful combat spell a 20th-level wizard has.

 

[Malachei]

I wasn't talking about Dispel Magic (the third level spell), at all, but about Greater Dispel Magic.

IMO, you should stand chance of dispelling or counterspelling a spell in a serious encounter against a full-caster, who will be approximately 2-4 levels above your party -- essentially resulting in a ~30-40% of success (without special modifiers).

I agree with you that the epic rules require homework. I don't think, however, that it is an epic issue, only. Also, the epic rules are part of the 3.5 SRD. Finally, it just seems odd that nobody on the design team thought about this. IMO, there should be a higher cap for GDM (maybe +25), and a higher, uncapped version of GDM (maybe a 9th-level spell). If we're facing issues with GDM becoming useless, I think I'd introduce a fix like this.

 

[Shin Okada]

I wasn't talking about Dispel Magic (the third level spell), at all, but about Greater Dispel Magic.

IMO, you should stand chance of dispelling or counterspelling a spell in a serious encounter against a full-caster, who will be approximately 2-4 levels above your party -- essentially resulting in a ~30-40% of success (without special modifiers).

I agree with you that the epic rules require homework. I don't think, however, that it is an epic issue, only. Also, the epic rules are part of the 3.5 SRD. Finally, it just seems odd that nobody on the design team thought about this. IMO, there should be a higher cap for GDM (maybe +25), and a higher, uncapped version of GDM (maybe a 9th-level spell). If we're facing issues with GDM becoming useless, I think I'd introduce a fix like this.

Well, Epic rules are part of the 3.5 SRD. But most of those rules are not part of the paper version core rules, which is, the true commercial core rules for 3.5e D&D. IMHO design team's main policy was something like "3.Xe is a game which covers 1-20th level. Anything beyond that is truly optional and do-it-yourself thingy."

Greater Dispelling is covering up to CL20, which is the usual maximum of a spellcasters created only with core rules. Some may exceed few levels beyond that with some magic items and such. But some multiclassed-PC may have lower CL even at level 20th (remember Practiced Spellcaster was not in the core rules).

With optional rules like prestige classes, feats, items, etc. introduced by supplements, you can go beyond that. But at least, Chain Dispel covers up to CL 25.

Also note that Mordenkainen's Disjunction (9th-level spell) is a kind of the ultimate dispelling. It auto-dispel spells in the area along with permanent magic items, and thus hard to use, though.

I think those are good enough support, considering that epic campaign is truly optional (and not something openly encouraged) in 3.Xe.

Regarding the balance issues of epic campaign, Dispelling is not the only one. And indeed a minor one IMHO. For example, with monsters who has much higher CL than their CR, PCs may die instantly via Blasphemy. A dragon who has far much greater HDs than their CR can have unbeatable SR for their CR, with only one feat (Awaken Spell Resistance). Monsters' AC varies too much and it is hard for a DM to give good game-balance, etc.