Spell Compendium: What are the "broken" spells?

[Remathilis]

Among the most serious problems of the Spell Compendium is what it does to the size of the cleric and druid spell lists. These two classes (and any others who can prep from a limited list of spells) are given a pretty significant bump in power by adding all these spells to the mix. Even if we were to assume that each individual spell was well-balanced, the net effect would be to give clerics and druids significant advantages in flexibility over a spontaneous caster with a limited "known" list or even a wizard whose list is potentially endless but must buy most of those spells.

My ruling for divine prep casters (Cleric, druid, paladin, ranger) is they know all the spells in the PHB + 1 spell per caster level (no spell can be higher than the highest spell level you can use). Other spells can be bought (on scrolls) and learned (DC 15+SL).

So a 2nd level druid who gains a level learns one new spell from another source, which must a 2nd level spell or lower. Likewise, a 20th level cleric has the normal PHB list, 2 domains, and additional spells (not counting any he found or bought on scrolls and learned.

So far, it worked nicely.

 

[Runestar]

I've banned the Orb spells, not for their power, but because they encroach on the thematic flavour of the school of Evocation. With their inclusion, no convoker is going to miss banning the school of evocation.

Well, to be fair, evocation does have its fair share of useful spells. Just that few of them actually involve dealing damage, or the damage is secondary to the main effect...

 

[NewJeffCT]

I don't think Revivify is overpowered, as I believe it leaves the formerly dead recipient of the spell stable at -1. So, unless somebody then follows it up with a "Heal" or similar right afterwards, that Revivified PC is out of action... and, then you'd have at least 3 PCs out of action for that round - the dead one, now Revivified, the cleric who cast Revivify and the next person who would pull out & administer a healing potion, cast a healing spell, lay on hands, etc.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I don't think it's that bad. Paladins should have more options to be nasty at charging. Barbarians and Tome of Battle classes just blow them out of the water in that area. Heck, wildshaping druids, too.



Again, not that bad, and no where near as bad as Wraithstrike. It's level 3 or 4, and a Pal/Raner/Asn spell only, so it's not even available till late game. Takes a standard to cast, and only lasts round/level, benefitting one attack per round. I think in general classes like these (and Hexblade, etc...) should have better spells. And as I noted before, Tome of Battle classes, STILL put these classes to shame. Maybe you don't use ToB, and that's part of our divide in opinion. Because by level 12, they can do that kind of damage in one attack, too. As can a druid wildshaped as a large cat. As can a barbarian built right.

And there are other ways to do melee touch attacks. ToB has Emerald Razor maneuver, available at ECL 3. Standard action, one attack against touch AC. It's useful, but not broken, and gets overshadowed for damage by later strike maneuvers IME. MIC has the heartseeker amulet to get a single attack against touch AC, and the impaling weapon enhancement, a +1 bonus. Both swift to activate and 3/day. The amulet is probably broken, the weapon property might also be, but is more limited in what it can be applied ot and ultimately will cost a lot more. I'm sure there's more ways out there, these (and Wraithstrike) are just the ones I can think of right now. Of all the possibilities, though, Find the Gap is by far the weakest of such options.





We put it to level 4 for arcane and divine casters. It's still very strong, and I may move it to 5th level in later campaigns. On that note, I'm not sure the Energy Immunity (or whatever the name is) spell should even exist. It does as it sounds like -- pick a type, and you're immune ot it. Lasts all day, and only level 6. I'd ban that before even nerfing Mass Energy Resist.



It still only lasts round/level, and if the target is't healed enough by the end of the duration, he's still quite screwed. I could see it in tandem with Revivify, but that'd get pricy, and is the kind of repeated abuse a DM should just say no to. Enemies, meanwhile, are free to attack other creatures. It's a level 4 spell, it will be too limited to buff the netire party with it in one combat (not to mention take several rounds to do) till near epic.
It could then cause problems, though.


It's also available at ECL 3. Yeah, this one is the most ban-worthy in the whole book.

In general, I don't think that "tome of battle characters can do it too" is a good defense. Tome of Battle itself is rather broken. More to the point, the mechanics of the game fall apart whenever characters and NPCs have attacks that will easily one-shot opponents of similar power on a roll of anything but a 1. Tactics and strategy go out the window and the game comes down to who wins initiative. Find the Gap and Rhino's Rush do that. As a general rule, anything that doubles damage or that turns melee attacks into touch attacks is overpowered and should be banned. WotC knew this when they introduced 3.5 (it was the explicit reason behind nerfing rhino hide armor) but had apparently scrapped the goal of balance by the time they wrote Spell Compendium. (And Tome of Battle--it's best not to even think of that).

As far as Delay Death goes, I think you are missing that it is an immediate action. So you don't need to spend five rounds buffing the whole party with it. You just wait until someone dies and then say, "no they don't." By mid levels, healing the character up after combat is trivially easy so the duration is not a mitigating factor. By level 11 or so, it essentially removes hit point damage as a way to die which removes the teeth from all melee monsters. (In combination with abilities like Rhino's Rush/Find the Gap, it also contributes to initiative being too important since the only way you can die by hp damage is to be suddenly killed in the first round of combat while the cleric is flatfooted).

Energy immunity, on the other hand, I do not see as an issue. It is long duration, but it is also a 6th or 7th level spell slot and a standard action which only protects one character. Even at level 20, 6th and 7th level spell slots are a sacrifice that characters feel and the need to use a standard action to protect one character renders it a generally poor in-combat strategy. So, it's a general buff spell that will sometimes work and sometimes won't. As such, it doesn't seem out of line.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I don't think Revivify is overpowered, as I believe it leaves the formerly dead recipient of the spell stable at -1. So, unless somebody then follows it up with a "Heal" or similar right afterwards, that Revivified PC is out of action... and, then you'd have at least 3 PCs out of action for that round - the dead one, now Revivified, the cleric who cast Revivify and the next person who would pull out & administer a healing potion, cast a healing spell, lay on hands, etc.

Revivify is pretty close to being overpowered, but it worked out ok in our age of worms campaign. Just remember that it has expensive material components (not as much as the other raise dead type spells but it isn't free).

Also, in my list of spells that absolutely need to be banned, I realized that I forgot one important series of spells: any spell that gives you extra standard actions needs to be banned. As I recall, there is a series of spells that lets you steal the move, standard, etc action from your next turn. They should all be banned (along with the MIC belt of battle). 3.0 Haste does not need to return to the game. It was bad in 3.0 and continued to be bad in 3.5.

 

[Invincible Overlord]

Revivify is pretty close to being overpowered, but it worked out ok in our age of worms campaign. Just remember that it has expensive material components (not as much as the other raise dead type spells but it isn't free).

Also, in my list of spells that absolutely need to be banned, I realized that I forgot one important series of spells: any spell that gives you extra standard actions needs to be banned. As I recall, there is a series of spells that lets you steal the move, standard, etc action from your next turn. They should all be banned (along with the MIC belt of battle). 3.0 Haste does not need to return to the game. It was bad in 3.0 and continued to be bad in 3.5.

I believe that the spell you're thinking of is the Celerity Line of spells, out of PHB2.

As far as 3.5 Haste goes, it's much tamer than any 1st, 2nd, or 3.0 Ed D&D version (and easily managable).

And the Belt of Battle is kinda broken, but it only has 3 charges (which means for most adventurers once-a-day greatness).

 

[akbearfoot]

Evards menacing tentacles is extremely broken.

2 extra attacks with reach as FREE actions every round. That means you can use them as part of a charge or AoO. Our GM let a druid in our group take the spell, and he got to cast it about 3 times before it was taken away.

 

[Eldritch_Lord]

In general, I don't think that "tome of battle characters can do it too" is a good defense. Tome of Battle itself is rather broken. More to the point, the mechanics of the game fall apart whenever characters and NPCs have attacks that will easily one-shot opponents of similar power on a roll of anything but a 1. Tactics and strategy go out the window and the game comes down to who wins initiative. Find the Gap and Rhino's Rush do that. As a general rule, anything that doubles damage or that turns melee attacks into touch attacks is overpowered and should be banned. WotC knew this when they introduced 3.5 (it was the explicit reason behind nerfing rhino hide armor) but had apparently scrapped the goal of balance by the time they wrote Spell Compendium. (And Tome of Battle--it's best not to even think of that).

I would argue that "Tome of Battle characters do it too" is a perfectly fine defense. It's not nearly as broken as most new to the book often think it is--unless they hold up core fighter and barbarian as the pinnacle of balance, in which case this thread is useless because every non-core spell would be considered "broken."

If you want to talk about one-shotting enemies, the fighter and barbarian can get their damage up much higher than a Tome of Battle character; the Tome folks simply bring up the low end, so a new player doesn't build a melee character ranging from "sucks absolutely" to "rocks absolutely" but rather one ranging from "below par" to "very good." Touch attacks for melee characters aren't a particular problem, it's touch attacks in general (c.f. disintegrate and a sword swing), so if you're not banning every single touch spell there's no reason melee types shouldn't get some touch attacks as well.

 

[billd91]

Find the Gap and Rhino's Rush do that. As a general rule, anything that doubles damage or that turns melee attacks into touch attacks is overpowered and should be banned. WotC knew this when they introduced 3.5 (it was the explicit reason behind nerfing rhino hide armor) but had apparently scrapped the goal of balance by the time they wrote Spell Compendium. (And Tome of Battle--it's best not to even think of that).

It had apparently been scrapped as an idea when they introduced crits, the lance, and the spirited charge feat as well. Doubling damage on a single attack is not at all overpowered nor unbalanced in the context of 3.x D&D.

 

[zypherillius]

Correct: Avasculate/Avascular Mass take out half current HP, no save, and then require a Fort save to avoid being stunned for a round. They require a touch attack, however, so it isn't necessarily guaranteed damage...though it is pretty close.

In the last campaign I ran, four of the ten casters in the campaign took Avasculate when they got access to 7th level spells, two of them in each five-person party...when they both met up, they could effectively drop a creature to 1/16 health and auto-stun them. Fun times.

I used to take Avasculate as a staple spell for ANY wizard, and every time id cast, everybody would say 'not stunned.' avasculate is very powerful, especially with a high dex, split ray or levels or archmage and it as a spell like ability. i never messed with avascular mass since we didnt enjoy doing all the tangle stuff and the radius.