Is this a viable spell

Moff_Tarkin

First Post
I am reasearching new spells with my wizard and I came up with one that is a variation of fireball, and I want to know if its a acceptable spell for 3rd level.

As I understand, you can start with an existing spell and reduce it in some ways in order to enhance it in others. My spell idea is balically fireball, but it only hits one person and does a d6 per 2 leves (max 5D6). So basically its a fire ball that hits one person and does half damage. The up part is that there is no save for the spell. I specificaly created this for those annoying rouges, monks, ect. who have a habbit of avoinding my spells and taking no damage.

Is this an acceptable 3rd level spell? Did I put enough limitations on it, or did i put too many.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

log in or register to remove this ad


I have another spell idea that I imagine must exist somewhere, I want to know what people think about it.

Basically it's a level 1 arcane spell, invisibility to constructs. My freind thought it was overpowered for level one buy let me explain my logic. Both druids and clerics get a specialized invisibility spell at level one (plants and undead respectivly). Funcions just like invis but is one level lower becouse it only targets one specific type of creature. I figure the arcane spellcasters need a level one, specific target invis. And constructs seems perfect.

As for the magic missle thing, it wolnt work. In the game before this one, one of our players got into an argument with and killed our now current DM with a wand of magic missiles. So, in retribution, the now current DM placed a curse upon his characater that any magic missile fired in his vicinity instantly goes and hits him. I think its bull sh*t, carring in an old grudge from another game. Of course every one of us who has been killed by a fellow player has yelled "You SOB, I'm going to kill every character you make from now on" No one has backed up that threat however.
 

First variant: Don't like it. It's basically some Icestorm variant... and even there a no save spell without touch attack or so... is weird.
 


The fireball variant looks ok to me. You avoid collateral damage but do less possible damage and can't kill swarms of mooks.

The second one also sounds balaned against Invisibility to Undead. The only question that remains is "is Invisibility to Undead" balanced? If you think it is (your friend seemingly wouldn't) then Invisibility to Constructs is also cool.
 

Moff_Tarkin said:
I am reasearching new spells with my wizard and I came up with one that is a variation of fireball, and I want to know if its a acceptable spell for 3rd level.

As I understand, you can start with an existing spell and reduce it in some ways in order to enhance it in others. My spell idea is balically fireball, but it only hits one person and does a d6 per 2 leves (max 5D6). So basically its a fire ball that hits one person and does half damage. The up part is that there is no save for the spell. I specificaly created this for those annoying rouges, monks, ect. who have a habbit of avoinding my spells and taking no damage.

Is this an acceptable 3rd level spell? Did I put enough limitations on it, or did i put too many.

The damage for the spell actually strikes me as being too low for a 3rd level spell. Seeing as this spell would still do fire damage, I'd personally see no problems with upping to damage to something like 1d4/level (max 10d4).

-Eraslin
 


dcollins said:
House Rules, please.
Spell design and balancing is dicsussed in the DMG, and given rules to follow. The question posed is "does this spell meet the balance guidelines?" As sch its a perfectly fine question for a rules forum. When it comes time to quntify the spell and lay out al of its parameters it'll probably need to move to house rules.
 


Remove ads

Top