Opinions wanted for 2nd level offensive spells

[Jens]

Note: updated versions are posted below (still this page)


Do you think these are reasonable as standard spells? The basic premise is the DMG's table 3-22 (page 95) which gives 2nd level arcane spells a damage cap of 10 dice against one opponent. (Do any spells actually do that? Melf's AA can be argued, but other than that?) Anyway - any thoughts or comments on these spells?


Acid Bolt
Evocation [Acid]
Level: Sor/Wiz 2
Target: One creature or object
Saving Throw: Fortitude half
As Acid Orb except only one missile is created which deals 1d6 points of damage per caster level to a maximum of 10d6. There is no nauseating effect and no splash damage.

Cold Bolt, Electric Bolt, Fire Bolt, and Sonic Bolt are all similar lesser cousins to the respective Orb spells. They have no secondary effects, either.


Improved Magic Missile
Evocation [Force]
Level: Sor/Wiz 2
Target: One creature
As Magic Missile except only one missile is gained which deals 1d4+1 points of damage per caster level to a maximum of 10d4+10.


Lesser Enervation
Necromancy
Level: Sor/Wiz 2
Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft. /2 levels)
As Enervation except only one negative level is gained.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

The various "elemental" bolts seem okay at first glance...

The improved magic missile would be fun to cast, but not to be on the receiving end of... It's basically making a 2nd level "instant kill" spell for high level mages. Bad idea.

Zapping a 1st level dude with lesser enervation would drain him to zero level and consequently kill him. Another "instant kill" spell at 2nd level. Bad idea.

 

[Admiral Ray]

Kaptain_Kantrip, I had to check the condition summary of the SRD to check the level drain to death thing, but that's correct. I wasn't aware that still happened in 3e.

A restriction could be added to the spell stating if the target already has [character level - 1] negative levels, it doesn't affect them. Or that they don't die. That could fix it.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Here's an example of how I earned my Kaptain's rank... and my funny pointed hat!

I think the proposed spell, "lesser enervation," is granting high level spell effects to low level casters, and that, my friends, is setting a rather dangerous precedent... (drum roll, please)

Look at "lesser restoration", a 2nd level spell: it does not cure level drain, only ability score drain. If it cured level drain, then I would be more willing to endorse the idea of "lesser enervation" as its polar opposite and a 2nd level spell. But that's patently not the case.

As it stands in the game, only powerful undead and higher level necromancers can energy drain targets. The reason for this is sound: it is a very deadly ability and should have limits placed on who or what can create that effect.

I would suggest rethinking the spell to make it a stronger or more utilitarian "ray of enfeeblement," perhaps targeting an ability of the caster's choice for temporary drain. That seems much more in line with a 2nd level spell and creates a safer, more balanced result.

 

[Jens]

Q: Is Lesser Enervation a certain kill spell against 1HD opponents?
A: Yes, definitely. That was actually part of the reason for the spell. Just like Melf's Acid Arrow which inflicts at least 4d4 HPs damage (no save) and has 16 times the range.

Now, I don't know if draining is simply too powerful an effect for 2nd level. I don't think so, but it may be. But why should any type of effect be 'simply too powerful' for any given level? What I mean is: Teleportation is too powerful for 3rd level. But if thinking of teleportation as *very* enhanced movememt, we have lesser movement enhancers at 3rd level, Fly and Haste. At 2nd level we have Levitate and at 1st level we have Jump and Exp Retreat. So enhancing movement can be done by spells of less than 5th level.

Similarly, I was considering what kind of draining ability would be suitable as a 2nd level spell and came up with the spell above. Now, if it doesn't fit at 2nd level it must certainly fit at 3rd level since it is significantly weaker than Enervation:
- Range: One-quarter the range.
- Effect: 1 negative level instead of 1d4. This means that it cannot benefit from the Maximize or Empower feats.

I considered making the negative level go away very quickly (say, after 1 round per caster level) but the 'duration' of 1 hour per caster level seem to be hard-coded into negative levels.

KK, what if the lost level returned after 1 round per caster level?

I don't think it will be easy to make a 2nd level version of Ray of Enfeeblement. At a level higher than Ray of Enfeeblement, the effect must be better. Possibilities:
- Range: May be extended, but I don't really think this kind of spell should have longer range that Close (what's that with Enervation?)
- Duration: This could be extended, either 10 minutes or 1 hour per level. But it's rarely attractive for the caster.
- Save: This could be removed, but then it may become very dangerous
- Nonstacking: I think the rules simply don't allow enhancement penalties to stack with themselves, so this can't be changed. If the penlaty was allowed to stack, the spell could take out *anything* with a couple of applications.
- Against Str: Imo the only reasonable alternative for a draining spell would be to reduce Con, though reducing the Intelligence of a wizard could be fun . Str loss hampers a fighter but he rarely loses abilities outright. Str loss may make an opponent unable to move, though. Reducing any score
- 1d6 +1 per 2 levels (max +5): If this is increased much, it may become possible to take out *anything*. Just adding another 1d6 may be too much.

... You probably have a good idea as to what it might do?

(Ok, I know this is a messy post, but please bear with me )

 

[Jens]

The various "elemental" bolts seem okay at first glance...

Yes, I would think so. Would it be too much to give them (some) secondary effects against objects (Fire Bolt sets things on fire etc.)? How about against individuals (say, the same effects as the Orb spells)?

The improved magic missile would be fun to cast, but not to be on the receiving end of... It's basically making a 2nd level "instant kill" spell for high level mages. Bad idea.

I partially agree, bui I'm not sure how it should be toned down. To keep the similarity with MM, it should not require attack roll or allow saving throw. Then there's pretty much only damage left to adjust. A reduction would probably mean 1d4 per level. Per 2 levels, that would be 2d4 points of damage while MM does 1d4+1 points of damage. Would that be enough of a difference to warrant a higher level *and* a restriction to one target only?

Or how about multiple missiles inflicting a total of 1d4 per level up to 10d4, with each missile 'taking up' at least 2d4 so you can't have more than 5 missiles and the missiles are 'at least as big as' those of MM? Hmm, might as well just make it identical to MM except each missile inflicts 2d4 instead of 1d4+1. I think I like that. What do you think?

 

[milo]

Greater ray of Enfeeblement could have a higher cap , maybe +10, and do D8 instead of D6. The higher cap wouldn't make a difference until after 11th level and by that time the sorcerer or wizard is already powerful so it doesn't matter that much.

 

[billking]

I love it when people ask themselves rhetorical questions, because it usually means they've stopped thinking and started preaching to themselves.

Q: Is Lesser Enervation a certain kill spell against 1HD opponents?
A: Yes, definitely. That was actually part of the reason for the spell. Just like Melf's Acid Arrow which inflicts at least 4d4 HPs damage (no save) and has 16 times the range.

Like right here for instance. 4d4 hit points seems like a lot, and I guess it is. But that's still only 4-16 hit points. Only against a rare few does even the maximum damage, 16 points, mean an instant kill; although it will get them into dying range, at least the cleric might be able to heal them up. And the average damage of 4d4 is 10, which means more often than not a 1st-level fighter can take one and still keep going. (Assuming he has a Constitution of 12 or more.)

Not to mention that Melf's deals 2d4 of that damage one round later. That's one more round where the subject has a chance to return the favor and smite you for probably more than 5 damage.

Not to say Melf's isn't great and all, it's deadly. But it's not near your level of instant kill. Your lesser enervation is honestly about 3rd level, where it fits in better (fireball deals an average of 17 damage to each subject at 5th level).

Similarly, the "unblockable" nature of your improved magic missile makes it too powerful. I know you want more interesting 2nd-level spells but the spell decides the level, not the other way around, so be patient.

 

[Jens]

I love it when people ask themselves rhetorical questions, because it usually means they've stopped thinking and started preaching to themselves.

Actually, I was trying to write it in a clear and concise way as I know I tend to ramble at times. I guess I could just have said that I was aware that the spell would kill 1HD targets.

Anyway - The spell may be too powerful for 2nd level. Options I see: (don't mean to preach to anyone hee, just listing things as I see them)
- Give a Fortitude save to negate. The chance to avoid the effect (unusual for negative damage spells, isn't it?) is a big weakness so I'd say the spell should have the full range of Enervation.
- Raise it to 3rd level. Again I'd say the spell should have the full range of Enervation. I don't think it will be a very attractive 3rd level spell - the real thing is only one level higher, but that may just be how it's supposed to be for a 'lesser' version.


Melf's has good aspects that my proposed spell doesn't have. Range, damage over time (good against spellcasters), good scaling (up to 14d4 over 7 rounds), takes well to metamagic such as Extend. I considered it at the very lowest caster level, and I must admit that I was thinking of a 1HD opponent with rolled HPs and average Con, in which case he would end up dying. But it's correct that a 1st level fighter probably will remain standing if hit by a MAA cast at 3rd level.

Similarly, the "unblockable" nature of your improved magic missile makes it too powerful. I know you want more interesting 2nd-level spells but the spell decides the level, not the other way around, so be patient.

Why can't it be done the other way around, having the level determine the spell? Why can't a spell be made to fit a 'mold' such as "2nd level spell with force missile effect"? Must the level be determined last?

Anyway, if we assume that it is possible to make a reasonable 2nd level spell with a force missile effect, how would it then look? Above I suggested simply increasing the damage of the magic missiles from 1d4+1 to 2d4. Would that be reasonable?

 

[GuardianLurker]

Why can't it be done the other way around, having the level determine the spell? Why can't a spell be made to fit a 'mold' such as "2nd level spell with force missile effect"? Must the level be determined last?

Unfortunately, yes. A spell's defining characteristic(s) is the effect it produces, not its level. Given a rigorous, algorithmic manner of rating and combining spell effects, you could accurately set the spell level based on the effect. Unhappily, the potential combination of all the various "components" of a spell make determining the level very much an art. (Heck, people are talking about whether haste and fly are "overpowered" for their level, and both spells have been in the game since its beginning. After thirty-years of play-testing the issue still isn't settled.)

The only (admittedly tiresome) way to reliably rate a spell is to postulate its effect, compare to the target, reduce/enhance as appropriate, and repeat until done.

Also, keep in mind that not all aspects of a spell are created equal. In the "default" dungeon-crawl environment of 3e, any range longer than close is essentially the same, since encounters will be typically occurring at close range. Now which aspects are worth more, by how much, and so on is going to vary from GM to GM.

As for "improved MM", in 2e FR there was a spell called "Major Missile". As I recall, it was *identical* to MM, except there was no missile cap - so a 15th level caster would have 8 missiles instead of 5. It was a 5th level spell. MM is a tricky spell - it's at the high-power end of 1st (as determined by how often and early its taken), so it doesn't take a whole lot of improvement to push it into 2nd, and any substantial change is probably going to push it into 3rd. Now that we have Metamagic feats, a good rule-of-thumb (IMO), is to make a meta-magiced version of a spell one level less when the feat is an integral part. This would mean that a +1 metamagiced MM is probably what you're looking for, placing it solidly in second level. You *might* be able to get away with a +2 metamagic feat, but my guess is that the result would still be a little too powerful for second level.

As for the "Lesser Enervation", as someone has suggested, a "tunable" Ray of Enfeeblement is probably right, and the best I've heard so far. The other solution (staying much closer to enervation itself)would be to inflicit penalties equivalent to a negative level, but have them wear off much quicker. (Of course, this is exactly what enervation itself does.) I'd suggest having it wear off in rounds, not hours, if you go this route, as the difference between minutes and hours (from the P.o.V of the original caster) is immaterial (both are longer than the combat it was cast in), probably adding a Fort save to boot. (Again, not all saves are equal; high Fort saves are very common, high Ref save less so, and high Will saves are rare [typically only found with spellcasters].)

Oh, and it always helps to place a full write-up, not just a "it's the same as X with the following changes"; having all the capabilities described makes it a lot easier to analyze.