Spell Turning: Did it get the shaft?

[Pax]

We are talking about a normal game, right? So there may be one NPC in the entire game with that level of spell penetration. Every other NPC is stuck with SP and possibly GSP.

The other +6 that you are getting from mysterious sources does not really matter, IMHO.

A single Ioun stone and Heirophant for 5 levels, maxxing out the Spellpower.

Besides, the bead of karma boosts the cleric's SR by four. I also forgot the orange ioun stone. I'd add in spell girding (effectively making it +2SR), but then I might have to add something from another non-core source, so I'll leave that out.

And boosts enemy clerics SR penetration by 4, as well. What's good for the goose, is good for the gander, after all. And spell girding helps against Dispel attempts, not SR penetration.

This is also neglecting that most NPCs are lower caster level in the first place. (Unless your campaign is abnormal)

I'd say your campaign may be the one that is abnormal. Do you often throw paper-mache enemies against the "PC Meatgrinder"?

Spellcasters worth the defensive spellwork tend to be equal level; BBEG-type spellcasters tend to have 3-6 levels more than the average PC.

So say a PC cleric has 12 +cl +5 (bead of karma and orange ioun stone, both core)

The NPC would have 1d20 +cl +4 (SP and GSP)

Again: if the Cleric can have the Bead, so can the NPC, if he's a divine caster.

17 to 14.5 if their caster levels are the same. PC Cleric wins 57.5% of the time.

Only because you presuppose a higher modifier for the PC than the NPC. That isn't always going to be the case.

That's also assuming that the caster levels are the same. (Which would mean one caster at your level for a balanced encounter. Two casters of your level would be overpowering.) Most encounters have casters that are 1 or more caster levels lower than the PCs.

Two casters at your level would be a CR of Party Level plus one. Mildly challenging, not overpowering.

A caster of Party Level, plus or minus two, with a mob of lower-level mooks/goons/thugs, would be a moderately challenging encounter.

Of which a PC cleric has a better than average chance of ignoring, considering a PC is generally a higher caster level than NPCs, the bead of karma, and the orange ioun stone.

Cast on one's self, Nondetection's base DC is 15, plus caster level. So even if the NPC is five levels below the cleric, that puts it to a fifty fifty chance. At even levels, that makes up for BOTH the ioun stone, AND the bead of karma, and keeps it at fifty/fifty.

Throw in caster level boosts of some sort for the NPC (spellpower, an ioun stone, a bead of karma if he's a cleric), and it swiftly degenerates from there.

And anyway, True Seeing says it sees through illusions. Mirror Image creates illusions. Nondetection effects a creature or an object, not the mirror images surrounding you. (At least, that's my interpretation of it.)

That wouldn't be supported by the rules, however. You'd know there was a mirror image spell going, but you would not be able detect which of the images was the REAL target[/b]. Not without that caster level check (which, BTW, is one caster level check where Spell Penetration is useless). So while you'd know that, say, five of the six Big Evil Wizards infront of you weren't real ... you wouldn't know WHICH of those six were the false ones, and which was the real one.

That's rather the point of Nondetection, after all.

 

[Merlion]

You guy's have lost me pretty much. Shall we go back to the Spell Turning thing?


You have a good point about Spell Resistance Concrete. Really, I would probably rather have it up than Spell Turning. Depending on circumstances of course. As a general defense against enemy magic, its almost certainly better.

 

[Pax]

Yes, SR is the general, long-term defense.

Spell Turning is the specific, short-term defense.

Each has their use and purpose.

 

[Merlion]

Yes...Spell Turning doesnt fulfil its purpose very well however, since it affects so few types of spells (and so few levels of spells)

And an arguement can be made for Spell Resistance being a better defense overall, period. Specfic and general, across the board. A spell 2 levels lower. Because while Spell Turning may automatically work (and turn the spell) it can only turn one high level spell, or a couple of lower level ones...and only of a limited selection of types. Spell Resistance doesnt always work, but it always affects all levels of spells, and affects an unlimited number of spells.

To be truly worth 7th level, I maintain that Spell Turning needs to affect all spells that are subject to spell resistance other than area effects. Although with the stipulation that with rays and other attack roll spells, they would of course not be turned if you fail the attack roll.

 

[Pax]

To be truly worth 7th level, I maintain that Spell Turning needs to affect all spells that are subject to spell resistance other than area effects. Although with the stipulation that with rays and other attack roll spells, they would of course not be turned if you fail the attack roll.

I'd rather see Spell Turning divorced entirely from SR. I'd rather see it affect "all spells specifically targetted upon the caster", period, no need to check for SR vulnerability.

 

[Camarath]

Yes...Spell Turning doesnt fulfil its purpose very well however, since it affects so few types of spells (and so few levels of spells)

What do you believe the purpose of the spell Spell Turning is?

 

[Otterscrubber]

I'm confused, where does it say that Spell Turning does not stop ray spells? It reads thus in the SRD:

"Spells and spell-like effects targeted on you are turned back upon the original caster. The abjuration turns only spells that have you as a target. Effect and area spells are not affected. Spell turning also fails to stop touch range spells.

Touch Range spells is not the same thing as ranged touch spells is it? One is spells with "Range: Touch" and the other requires a ranged touch attack. Am I dumb and reading this wrong? Rays should be turned just fine by Spell Turning.

 

[Merlion]

Because of this:

Effect and area spells are not affected.

Rays are all Effect spells. So are pretty much all spells with ranged touch attacks.

I'd rather see Spell Turning divorced entirely from SR. I'd rather see it affect "all spells specifically targetted upon the caster", period, no need to check for SR vulnerability.

Well, as I said, to me a ray is targeted. It isnt a "targeted spell" but its a spell, and its aimed at one person only.

And again...a spell such as you describe wouldnt be 7th level...its to limited. Unless maybe it turned a whole lot of spell levels worth of spells.

What do you believe the purpose of the spell Spell Turning is?

To turn spells. The majority of them. Not all...and not a small fragment. And to turn enough of them to be with while.

 

[Scion]

ray spells are effect: ray. Effect spells arent turned

Edit: beaten to the punch..lol

 

[Camarath]

To turn spells. The majority of them. Not all...and not a small fragment. And to turn enough of them to be with while.

It does turn spells. IMO that is a very powerfull effect. I admit it does not turn most spells but it does turn a sizable portion of them. Whether or not a spell is worth while is highly subjective and thus an almost impossible thing to "prove".