Spell Compendium
- Thread starter Shadeydm
- Start date
TessarrianDM
First Post
Abyssal Army, Heavenly Host, Hellish Horde: Simply because with a nine-member party plus two intelligent mounts (paladin's warhorse and healer's unicorn) and seven players, I have no desire to add up to 13 more NPC's for them to control in combat.
Dragon Ally (All versions): Dragons are rare in my campaign world, and I want interaction with them to remain strictly under my control, at times of my choosing.
Call Kolyarut, Marut, and Zelekhut: I prefer the characters to do their own tasks, not get someone else to do them instead. If I change my mind on these three, I would increase the XP cost to keep the number of times they are used down.
Dragon Ally (All versions): Dragons are rare in my campaign world, and I want interaction with them to remain strictly under my control, at times of my choosing.
Call Kolyarut, Marut, and Zelekhut: I prefer the characters to do their own tasks, not get someone else to do them instead. If I change my mind on these three, I would increase the XP cost to keep the number of times they are used down.
The Lost Muse
First Post
None - but then, my players have not reached high enough level often enough to really delve into the Spell Compendium - most of their spells were drawn from the PHB. Although orb of force is a popular choice.
The way I see it is: anything they can do, I can do more often. (If truly necessary, although it's been a long time since I had to nerf/kill any characters for being too powerful.)
The way I see it is: anything they can do, I can do more often. (If truly necessary, although it's been a long time since I had to nerf/kill any characters for being too powerful.)
Steel_Wind
Legend
I allowed it all in. Every single spell.
My campaign has been fine. There is a LOT of Spell Compendium use at the table. I would estimate over half the spells the players cast are from the Compendium.
Level of the party is now 13th, with a Wizard, Mystic Theurge nad Druid casting from the Compendium - so that's a broad selection of material.
The only spell that pissed me off a little was Downdraft.
My campaign has been fine. There is a LOT of Spell Compendium use at the table. I would estimate over half the spells the players cast are from the Compendium.
Level of the party is now 13th, with a Wizard, Mystic Theurge nad Druid casting from the Compendium - so that's a broad selection of material.
The only spell that pissed me off a little was Downdraft.
Mouseferatu
Hero
I haven't DMed too much since SC came out, but when I did, the only spells I banned--with 100% player approval--was celerity and its relatives.
See, I spent a lot of time playing in a campaign with a sorcerer who made frequent use of those spells. And the thing is, it's not that they're unbalanced. I didn't ban them for mechanical reasons.
I banned them because it made combats a slot slower, and a lot more boring, for everyone but the sorcerer. Being able to cast two spells in a round, and to do so out of initiative order, is incredibly disruptive. And the loss of an action in the following round never seemed to make up for it. (Especially since many fights were ended by the double-use of spells, meaning there was no following round, meaning the caster suffered no real penalty.)
We just decided that the spell detracted more from the fun than it added.
Every other spell (so far) has been played as written, though I'll admit I'm contemplating doing what others have done, and adding SR to the orb spells. (Mostly for flavor, more than mechanics. I just don't buy them as Conjuration spells, and as Evocation spells, they should have SR.)
See, I spent a lot of time playing in a campaign with a sorcerer who made frequent use of those spells. And the thing is, it's not that they're unbalanced. I didn't ban them for mechanical reasons.
I banned them because it made combats a slot slower, and a lot more boring, for everyone but the sorcerer. Being able to cast two spells in a round, and to do so out of initiative order, is incredibly disruptive. And the loss of an action in the following round never seemed to make up for it. (Especially since many fights were ended by the double-use of spells, meaning there was no following round, meaning the caster suffered no real penalty.)
We just decided that the spell detracted more from the fun than it added.
Every other spell (so far) has been played as written, though I'll admit I'm contemplating doing what others have done, and adding SR to the orb spells. (Mostly for flavor, more than mechanics. I just don't buy them as Conjuration spells, and as Evocation spells, they should have SR.)
I allow everything, although I have reservations about Wraithstrike. (OTOH, no-one has it in my groups). Given we've played up to 21st level with SC, I consider it essential. 
(One spell in basic PHB I want to nerf? Tasha's Hideous Laughter. *Way* overpowered).
Cheers!
(One spell in basic PHB I want to nerf? Tasha's Hideous Laughter. *Way* overpowered).
Cheers!
Lancelot
Adventurer
I've seen three things that have raised eyebrows in my group.
1) Owl's Insight, the 5th lvl druid spell that gives you a major enhancement bonus to Wisdom. A single-class 19th lvl cleric PC gained access to the spell via Miracle, used divine metamagic to make it persistent... and then took a single level of monk. Suddenly, his spell DCs are berserk and his AC (with no armor) is beating out the party fighters. Now, admittedly, the divine metamagic feats fill me with sick dread... but even without persisting it, the huge enhancement buff is ripe for broken-ness. Potentially gaining +5 or more to your spell DCs is huge. I'd prefer they just stuck with Owl's Wisdom.
2) The Orb spells. I don't think they're broken, but they're good enough that nearly every mage of any kind that I've ever seen since their release has at least one. It's the one true failsafe. No save, no SR. All you've got to worry about it energy resistance and your attack roll. As a DM, though, I'm okay with them.
3) Ruin Delvers Fortune. This is the one that I'm closest to nerfing, although I'm loath to nerf spells. Not because it's necessarily overpowered, but because *every* player in my group (that's eight people...) now considers it mandatory. For the last 9 months, every sorcerer (or similar) in the group has taken this spell. The typical statement I hear is: "If stoneskin didn't have a material component, there *might* be some competition... but as it stands, any PC who even vaguely cares about his character must take this spell. End of story". Now, my group is pretty diverse - roleplayers, rollplayers, munchkins, and guys who are really just there to eat the pizza. But when everyone agrees that it's the first and only spell to take at 4th level, it worries me... because it's limiting diversity.
...oh, and for the record, there is only one spell from a 3.5 WotC source that I've ever actually banned in my games: Shivering Touch, from Frostburn.
3rd level Wizard/Sorcerer. Touch. 3d6 Dexterity damage. No save. It's ability damage, unlike the Strength penalty caused by Ray of Enfeeblement. Even without a Lesser Rod of Maximize (or similar), that will take down most "big" creatures in one shot. Conceivably, if you can beat it's SR, it's an insta-kill (no save) against a Great Wyrm Red Dragon (which, worse yet, takes +50% damage because of Cold subtype vs Fire subtype).
If anyone can find a flaw in the above analysis, or can point me to errata, I'd be much grateful.
1) Owl's Insight, the 5th lvl druid spell that gives you a major enhancement bonus to Wisdom. A single-class 19th lvl cleric PC gained access to the spell via Miracle, used divine metamagic to make it persistent... and then took a single level of monk. Suddenly, his spell DCs are berserk and his AC (with no armor) is beating out the party fighters. Now, admittedly, the divine metamagic feats fill me with sick dread... but even without persisting it, the huge enhancement buff is ripe for broken-ness. Potentially gaining +5 or more to your spell DCs is huge. I'd prefer they just stuck with Owl's Wisdom.
2) The Orb spells. I don't think they're broken, but they're good enough that nearly every mage of any kind that I've ever seen since their release has at least one. It's the one true failsafe. No save, no SR. All you've got to worry about it energy resistance and your attack roll. As a DM, though, I'm okay with them.
3) Ruin Delvers Fortune. This is the one that I'm closest to nerfing, although I'm loath to nerf spells. Not because it's necessarily overpowered, but because *every* player in my group (that's eight people...) now considers it mandatory. For the last 9 months, every sorcerer (or similar) in the group has taken this spell. The typical statement I hear is: "If stoneskin didn't have a material component, there *might* be some competition... but as it stands, any PC who even vaguely cares about his character must take this spell. End of story". Now, my group is pretty diverse - roleplayers, rollplayers, munchkins, and guys who are really just there to eat the pizza. But when everyone agrees that it's the first and only spell to take at 4th level, it worries me... because it's limiting diversity.
...oh, and for the record, there is only one spell from a 3.5 WotC source that I've ever actually banned in my games: Shivering Touch, from Frostburn.
3rd level Wizard/Sorcerer. Touch. 3d6 Dexterity damage. No save. It's ability damage, unlike the Strength penalty caused by Ray of Enfeeblement. Even without a Lesser Rod of Maximize (or similar), that will take down most "big" creatures in one shot. Conceivably, if you can beat it's SR, it's an insta-kill (no save) against a Great Wyrm Red Dragon (which, worse yet, takes +50% damage because of Cold subtype vs Fire subtype).
If anyone can find a flaw in the above analysis, or can point me to errata, I'd be much grateful.
Jondor_Battlehammer
First Post
Tsunami is the only one I have a problem with so far, but there are a few that are very good niche spells. Bolts of Glory leaps to mind, but I cannot say much about it, since I use it often as a player...
Similar Threads
