Substituting a spell

[Wyvernhand]

Ok dude...now you are just trying to prove a point. Everyone else has told you that its not a big deal. A caster with a 6th level spell can do something other casters can do with a lower level spell (or two) and a little more creativity. That doesn't stop the fact that they CAN do it. If they REALLY want to genocide a city block, they will do it regardless of whether you allow the spell or not. If you don't want them to do it, TALK TO THE PLAYER and tell them to stop being a douche. Banning/subbing this spell is simply treating the symptom, a symptom that probably won't even show up.

Is the spell overpowered for its level? No. Clearly not. Its good, but its niche, which lowers its overall power level. Could it provide an overwhelmingly strong option to solve one encounter? Yes. Will it solve all encounters? No.

Like any niche spell, it might seem OP when applied properly. Disintegrate is similar. Undead threat OR a pesky wall/door/gate/alter/etc in the way? Disintegrate fixes the problem in 6 seconds. Against most other foes/situations? Not really a good spell since it has 3 modes of failure (ranged touch + fort save + SR). Not terribly useful vs a giant or dragon, but man will it wreck a vampire or lich.

So yea, we've talked about it. Most people in this thread seem to think its a fine spell, and that you shouldn't restrict it from your players or swap it out for another spell. You probably won't even see it cast, and if so, probably not more than once or twice unless your campaign revolves around the PCs slaughtering mountains of low level NPCs. If you don't agree...fine. Do what you want. Play how you want to play. But then I have to ask...why ask here if you don't care about the answer? You aren't convincing anyone else here of your opinion, so...why?

And lose the attitude.

 

[Greenfield]

When someone says, "I can do X with this spell", and they clearly can't, it isn't "attitude" to call BS on it.

Calling Rock to Mud a mass damage spell is the kind of claim that I'd call a joke, if it was at all funny. Saying, "It is, if I can cast it 60 or 70 times" doesn't make it any funnier.

Comparing the 6th level spell to Gate, which is a 9th level spell, isn't much of a way to show that the 6th isn't overpowered. But to attempt that, and to get it wrong? Sorry, but I'm going to call BS on that one too.

As for "talk to the player", well, the player is me. I'm the one concerned about overpowering the game world with at-will tac-nukes. I thought I'd said that earlier. If not, my apologies for any misunderstanding.

And you're right, I won't cast that spell. But since I'm running a spontaneous caster with an inherently limited spell selection, and that spell is on the list (Sand Shaper prc), I was asking for suggestions for a good spell to drop in its place.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

... I suggested some spells.

Post #5. It's in there.

Have you considered any of them?

...it's odd when the OP seems to have derailed the OP...

 

[Greenfield]

And I appreciate it.

 

[Binho]

And the grunt soldiers can and will continue the battle far longer than most spell casters could even consider maintaining a spell barrage.

There's a difference in scale between a "battle" for an adventuring team, and a "battle" between armies. Adventurers might well be able to force their way into a city or fortified castle and take on the Black Knight who rules it, but they simply can't provide the "boots on the ground" needed to take the place over.

Adventurers get hired to take out the bad guys as an alternative to full scale war, decapitate the enemy leadership rather than fight their entire army. But, like the stories of fires taking out entire cities, these types of things get remembered because they're unusual. 999,999 times out of a million, a cow kicks over a lantern, one barn burns and that's about it. The fire brigade does their job. 999,999 times out of a million, it's the armies of Gondor that face down Sauron's Orc hordes, not a Ranger, a Wizard, a Dwarf fighter, an Elven archer and a couple of Hobbits sneaking in the back way that win the day.

That's why we tell stories like Lord of the Rings.

Lord of Rings do not count, the wizards there are not match to the D&D Wizard.

Moreover, High Level Wizard (15 as the example) vs Armies are an odd situation, but I put my coins on the wizard. Of course the wizard is going to run out of spells, but you do not intend to win a war in one day, do you? The tactic hit and run is the appropriate. The soldiers will not raise in the same rate that the wizard can kill.