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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jens" data-source="post: 75025" data-attributes="member: 605">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.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?</blockquote>

Verification