NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sepulchrave II" data-source="post: 3173371" data-attributes="member: 4303">If a mitigating factor is preferred it just costs the regular amount - e.g. 1 point of backlash will reduce the SP of a spell by 1 point. Non-preferred mitigation is only half-as-efficient - e.g. you'd have to suffer 2 points of backlash to mitigate the SP of a [call] spell by one point.I've kind of assumed that range and duration mitigating factors are 'always preferred,' because the seeds themselves are balanced on that basis. -2 per increment.It also occurs to me that we don't have any flexibility/limitation in the [call] seed regarding whether a spell is developed to target a specific individual. I think this should be worth a hefty discount - maybe even as high as -10. It's not like a call Amon (or whatever) spell is upgradeable in the usual sense, either - sure, when you're 10 levels higher you could modify it so that Amon takes a -5 on his saving throw, but he's not going to be much use to you at that point anyway. You'll want call Belial by then.Edit: But I really like the idea of a Goetic magician cowing a powerful outsider to his will over time. This idea needs more investigation.A -6 mitigating factor might be applicable to restricting [call] to a group of closely related creatures (demons, or angels etc.) and would be the corollary of the flexibility factor in [summon].I'd assumed that a +10 factor to use [call] to target unique outsiders (such as Amon) would be exactly balanced by the loss of utility in the spell. You could develop a totally generic spell or a completely specific spell at the same cost.By using the ensnarement/lure mechanic, a spell's developer could 'do the research' and target unique outsiders with a lower Wis score. The idea of a wizard thumbing through his clavicle and musing about which Infernal Duke is more gullible is kind of amusing.</blockquote>

Verification