Overpowered/Underpowered Spells?

[Merlion]

I dont think the damage die caps are always accurate, since like I said, theres spells that break its rules, but dont seem to cause any balance problems


I also feel its rather incomplete since it gives no suggestions on how it interacts with things like secondary effects, different die types, certain energy types (such as force) and the like (and of course theres no real guidlines at all for non-offensive spells)

And as to the other...I just find the arcane/divine divide of magic in DnD to be redundant, silly and distasteful. I'd rather have magic just be magic and any different forms stem solely from class (and to me the fact that the Druid as a "divine" spellcaster can have a 4th level damage spell thats better than Arcane 4th level damage spells without any real problems is just further proof of this).

Produce Flame is another good example, as a 1st level spell that can potentialy do as much as 20d6+100 points of damage over the course of 20 rounds at 20th level. Its spaced out and all, but it still sort of breaks the cap


And Burning Hands, as a 1st level spell, can do 5d4 damage to everyone in a 15 foot cone...and according to the chart, 1st level spells are supposed to be able to damage multiple enemies (unless the damage is divided amongst them)

 

[Nail]

Perhaps we should stick to the thread title and be polite

Amen.

3.5e Sheild is fine. Both the duration, range, and affect (only AC bonus and MM immunity) make it quite acceptable. It's only a problem if some yahoo tries to put it into a magic item as-is (1st level spell, Caster Level 1 = very cheap magic item).


...Then again, that's really a problem with several 1st level spells.

 

[apsuman]

Line of effect has been covered elsewhere... the solid being more dangerous is because there are ways to maintain line of effect when your target is inside a force cube(2 that I know of both of which are not mage friendly) . The option presented used the more enjoyable barred version

I prefer people actually read the spells being discussed instead of just reading something here and accepting it as canon.

Okay in response to a separate post.
1) Planar calling was in my original series of statements however as the spell itself was not cast during the time stop it was dropped in later posts I guess as it wasnt a point of contention. Planar calling by far is a horribly broken spell as it doesnt come with any real cost like its clerical counterpart.

2) The range of gust of wind is 60 ft. I appreciate the fact you have surmised the ranging effects of the gust of wind as being the "loophole" and not assuming I am blowing the cloudkill about which would dissipate it.

3) In regards to projected image it becomes the point of origin as the caster. therefore by changing its facing you can direct spells at different angles you wouldnt normally be able to obtain (which is why it made my overpowered list)

4) once again this was meant to show spells that work around SR and within the framework of time stop. also by attacking constitution directly instead of hps it becomes more favorable at higher levels over damaging effects that effect hps.

Khristos,

I am not trying to be ugly here, quite the opposite, I am trying to find out exactly what your killer combo is here. You never answer my posts directly (which is ok, I am not *THAT* big of an egomaniac) but you instead answer several posts in one reply (which would be fine) except that you never really answer my question(s). You might get closer to an answer but there is no real resolution.

So, I will try again. EXACTLY how do you use projected image especially as it relates to your cloud kill-planar ally-timestop-gust of wind combo? Given that the cloud is 40 feet across i just don't see how having a new location (the shadow caster) as it's "start spot" is useful.

Also, I don't know who the "loophole" comment is directed toward, but I really don't see how you can use gust of wind to in any way with a cloudkill. Since you think you can I am asking you, would you please explain how you use gust of wind with cloudkill?

 

[dcollins]

Its interesting to note, on a related topic, spells that are technically "overpowered" or break the rules, but are still fine.

Scorching Ray for instance does 12 dice of damage eventually and should only do 10, by the charts

Flame Strike as 4th level Druid spell and 5th level Cleric spell has a cap to high for an Arcane 4th level spell, by the charts.

But no one ever seems to have problems with them

I'd say thats a sign that the charts arent 100% infallible...of course I'd also say its another sign that the whole arcane/divine thing is rather silly.

Those charts are not rules. They are guidelines for new house-ruled spells created by the DM and/or players. They have nothing to do with spells in the core rules, they have been (in theory) balanced for the game on their own terms.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

And Burning Hands, as a 1st level spell, can do 5d4 damage to everyone in a 15 foot cone...and according to the chart, 1st level spells are supposed to be able to damage multiple enemies (unless the damage is divided amongst them)

With such a short range, the wizard is nearly stepping into melee to use the spell at all. Spells that have very short range and/or require ranged or melee touch attacks tend to be more powerful than the guidelines seem to suggest.

 

[strongbow]

Has anyone mentioned Control Winds yet?

 

[Merlion]

Those charts are not rules. They are guidelines for new house-ruled spells created by the DM and/or players. They have nothing to do with spells in the core rules, they have been (in theory) balanced for the game on their own terms.

I'd say thats extremely debatable on several levels. Technically, all DnD "Rules" are guidlines to a point....but I dont think they were really presented in a fashion anymore guidline-y than anything else.

Certainly, most people on these boards and in the rest of the online gaming community feel that they are rules since if they write anything that "breaks" them in any way (such as a spell that does the recomended cap in damage, and has some small secondary effect) it is called overpowered.

And, why would the balance the spells in the PH by one set of guidlines/rules and then present different ones in the DMG?

 

[Merlion]

With such a short range, the wizard is nearly stepping into melee to use the spell at all. Spells that have very short range and/or require ranged or melee touch attacks tend to be more powerful than the guidelines seem to suggest.

Oh indeed...I've got no problem with any of the spells I mentioned


I just think the rules/guidlines are far to limited and narrow. A page or so of advice and explanations and guidlines for all spell types would, I think, have been better

 

[dcollins]

I'd say thats extremely debatable on several levels. Technically, all DnD "Rules" are guidlines to a point....but I dont think they were really presented in a fashion anymore guidline-y than anything else.

It's in the section on "Creating New Spells". A spell like burning hands, is not a "new spell". The DMG says "A viable spell is one that you allow into the game." It also says "When creating a new spell, use the existing spells as benchmarks, and use common sense." It also says the chart is "more accurate" for some classes and less so for others. That's not a rule -- it's not even in the SRD -- it's just a suggestion.

Certainly, most people on these boards and in the rest of the online gaming community feel that they are rules since if they write anything that "breaks" them in any way (such as a spell that does the recomended cap in damage, and has some small secondary effect) it is called overpowered.

I disagree. This thread is on page 12 and you're the first person to bring these spells up. "Most people" (actually, anybody at all besides you) are not making an issue of this.

 

[Merlion]

It's in the section on "Creating New Spells". A spell like burning hands, is not a "new spell". The DMG says "A viable spell is one that you allow into the game." It also says "When creating a new spell, use the existing spells as benchmarks, and use common sense." It also says the chart is "more accurate" for some classes and less so for others. That's not a rule -- it's not even in the SRD -- it's just a suggestion.



I disagree. This thread is on page 12 and you're the first person to bring these spells up. "Most people" (actually, anybody at all besides you) are not making an issue of this.

Your misunderstanding me. I dont have a problem with Burning Hands or Flame Strike etc etc

I have a problem with the lack of useful consistent information on balancing spells in the DMG.

And, it has been my experience that on these boards, and elsewhere, with regard to new spells many seem to regard the damage die cap as a holy grail of spell design, and if you dont follow it exactly, whatever you've written is called overpowered.


You may well be right that that chart is not a "rule"

but large numbers of people I have encountered seem to treat it as such