Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Cheiromancer" data-source="post: 3186298" data-attributes="member: 141">Trying to make sense of my notes on this topic.  It's tricky.First, this is my chart for determining range factors;[code]Rangepersonal           +0touch (5 ft.)      +220 ft.             +4close (75 ft.)     +6medium (400 ft.)   +8long (1200 ft.)    +10extreme (4800 ft.) +12(about a mile)[/code]Quadrupling range is a +2 SP modifier.  This allows interpolation of values; a 10 ft. range would be +3, a 30 ft. range would be +5, and so on.[sblock]Mass EffectsThe general rule for mass versions of spells is that the spell goes from touch range (affecting one creature) to close range and affecting one creature per level, none of whom can be more than 30 ft. apart.  This costs anywhere from 1 spell level (mass fire shield, divine mass resist energy) to two levels (arcane mass resist energy) to three levels (mass suggestion) to four levels (mass cure light wounds, mass anibuffs, mass deathward).  Mass cure light wounds has a higher damage cap, and deathward is probably undervalued as a 4th level spell (or mass deathward is a trifle too expensive).  I am going to generalize the rule as +3 spell levels, and ignore spells like mass resist energy.The mass effect formula prices the factor for affecting multiple targets on the basis of four sub-factors:mass effect = primary range + secondary range + stickiness + multiplicityPrimary range: the distance between the caster and the origin of the spread.Secondary range: the distance between the origin of the spread and the edge of the area of effect.  The spread of effect can't exceed the primary range.  Note that “no two of which can be more than 30 ft. apart” is pretty close to fitting inside a 20-ft. radius spread.  (An equilateral triangle with 30 ft. sides fits into a circle with a radius of 17.32 feet.)  This secondary range becomes the length of the "leash" if a non-sticky form of the spell is chosen.  If the leash is longer than the spread of effect, price the ranges separately and take the average.Note: Increasing the secondary range effectively widens the spell at a cost of only +1 SP per doubling, at least until the primary range is reached.  So this ends up with an extremely cheap widen.Stickiness: +0 if the effect is instantaneous or harmful, or will expire if the secondary range is exceeded. (non-sticky)+4 if the effect is not instantaneous and beneficial,and will not expire when the secondary range is exceeded. (sticky)Multiplicity: +0 if effect is unselective and non-sticky. +6 if 20 targets or fewer are affected. +10 if any number of targets can be affected.Example: Mass cure light wounds is +14 SP over cure light wounds.  primary range is 75 ft.: +6 secondary range is "within 30 ft. of each other": +4 non-sticky: +0 (effect is instantaneous) up to 20 creatures: +6 Total: +16Cure light wounds had a range of touch (+2) so it has been improved by +14 SP in making the mass version.  The version in the book is four levels higher, not 2 (or possibly 3) levels higher, as this formula predicts.  The discrepancy is explained by noting that the level cap has also been raised from +5 to +25. For a 12th level caster each recipient will receive 16.5 hp instead of 9.5 hp.  That's more like a mass cure serious wounds than a mass cure light wounds. If the cap were not raised, MCLW would likely be a 3rd level spell.Example: Invisibility sphere is +5 SP over invisibility.primary range is touch: +2, but can't be less than the secondary range.  So +3 secondary range 10 ft.: +3 non-sticky: +0 multiplicity: +0Total: +6+6 SP is +1 spell level, so that's right.  Example: Fireball is +4 SP over a hypothetical ray based spell that does the same damage and has the same primary range.  The only difference is the secondary range factor of +4. Such an effect would be a bit weaker than the second level scorching ray.  Which fits the notion that scorching ray is a bit strong for second level; it is only 2/3 of a level below fireball which is a good 3rd level spell.Horrid wilting could be thought of as a double-empowered (+12) heightened x5 (+5)  unlimited target (+10) typeless (+8) fireball with an increased secondary range (+1) that can only affect living creatures (-4) = 32 SP = +5 levels.  So horrid wilting should be a strong 8th level spell.  Stronger than fireball is for its level, anyway.  I think this is true.Example: Mass fly is +14 SP more than fly. primary range: +6 secondary range: +6 (average of +4 and +8) sticky: +0 up to 20 creatures: +6Total: +16The range of effect is +4, but the "leash" is more like +8. Works out to be +14 SP more than fly.  Maybe 2 levels, but it would be a fairly strong spell.In general, making a mass version of a touch-based spell should about +18 SP. Primary range +6, secondary range +4, stickiness +4, 20 recipients +6.  A total of 20, or 18 more than the touch version's +2 range factor.  If the base spell had range: close, then a mass version that affects an unlimited number of targets would also be +18 SP.  Which could be nifty.The formula might need to be fiddled with to agree with a value of widen that is +3 SP.  (Doubling the secondary range and subtracting 4 would help; it wouldn't affect the pricing of most spells.  Invisibility sphere would be cheaper and horrid wilting more expensive, though.  That would be untidy.  Tripling and subtracting 8 would even worse) The current pricing scheme might make it too cheap to affect targets who are widely separated.It depends.  If casting a spell on an unlimited number of targets within range would be problematic, then this issue will need to be revisited.One could make the sticky factor more expensive.  At +10 it would yield +4 spell levels, like the mass anibuff spells.  That might be a better alternative if one is worried about mass versions of epic buffs.[edit]Bah.  I just went through the Spell Compendium.  I think they calculated the level adjustment for mass versions by rolling a d4.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f621.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":mad:" title="Mad    :mad:"  data-smilie="4"data-shortname=":mad:" /> Although they were having some poor rolls: eight 1s, twelve 2s, five 3s and only two 4s.  But that's OK- when they were rolling the PHB they got six 4s and a 3.  And a 5- must have burned an action point.[/sblock][edit2]I am uncomfortable with the "battlefield magic" implied by the analysis in the spoiler block. I think that I will propose the following:Factor: Mass Effect: The spell affects up to 20 targets, none of which can be more than 30-ft. apart.  Effects with durations persist on leaving the area. Minimum range is close.  Cost: 14 SPFactor: Personal Emanation: Affects all targets as long as they remain within 20-ft. of the origin of the emanation. A creature loses the effect if it leaves the area, and can't regain it by coming back. The cost depends on the range of the base spell:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">personal: 8 SP</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">touch: 6 SP</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">close+: 4 SP</li> </ul>Factor: Area Effect: A ray or targeted spell with an instantaneous duration affects all creatures in a 20-ft. radius burst. Minimum range is close. Cost: 6 SPFactor: Unlimited Targets: An effect which allows up to 20 targets now allows an unlimited number of targets.  Cost: 4 SPI fudged the Area effect factor up a bit; it should only be +4 by my calculations, but I want it to always be at least a spell level.The area can be adjusted by using the Widen factor (+3 to double all dimensions).  The Earthscorcher feat (or an analogue thereof) might be helpful in this respect.  A 10-fold increase in dimensions would be 9 widenings, or +27 SP.  It could change the base dimensions and thus have a vast synergetic effect on subsequent widenings.  I think I like it.</blockquote>

Verification