True Dispel Magic

Baronovan · May 17, 2005

Good point, Shenron. I'll look into expanding the dispel list for a true dispel.

Kalanyr · May 17, 2005

Judging by 3rd level (+10) , 6th level (+20) , I agree 9th should be (+30). Just for consistancy.

Terath Ninir · May 17, 2005

Baronovan said:
Considering how iffy the Epic spellcasting system is, I couldn't care less if a 9th level dispel steps on its toes. Frankly, I think the more we use "valent" spells to usurp the need for that system, the better.

If this place had a reputation system like Nothingland does, I'd be giving you Rep++ right now. The epic "rules" should *never* be used as a guideline for judging power. Your dislike of "Mordenkainen's Twinky DM Spell to Mess up the PCs for no Good Reason" is also lovely.

For a 9th level spell, I think no level cap and a +5 bonus would be reasonable. That would be pretty darn powerful -- but not nearly as powerful as The Bad Spell. Alternately, you could drop the +5 bonus and instead have the spell be able to ignore targets -- so you could cast it on an area and only attempt to dispel what you want to dispel. That's a pretty potent ability, but it's not unreasonable for a 9th level spell.

Baronovan · May 17, 2005

Ahh, Cyberzombie, your comments are a breath of fresh air.

I like a lot of the suggestions that have come from this thread, from Li Shenron's increased list of viable target spells to your "mastery of shaping" boon. Good stuff.

Baronovan · May 17, 2005

I've gotten some good feedback on this idea both here and at Dicefreaks, so I'll make the following proposal:

True Dispel Magic
Abjuration
Level: Clr 9, Sor/Wiz 9

This spell functions as dispel magic except that there is no maximum caster level on your dispel check. Additionally, true dispel magic can dispel any non-instantaneous magical effect, including antimagic field, forcecage and wall of force.
Finally, the caster may select his targets when using the area dispel option, choosing to exclude his allies from the effect if so desired.

Baronovan · May 17, 2005

Anybody have any concerns on the exclusionary power of the spell? Or on the spell itself?

ARandomGod · May 18, 2005

Staffan said:
9th might even be a little high for it. I mean, if you're gonna end spells with a 9th level spell, there's Mordenkainen's Disjunction for that.

Yes. Personally I already have a custom ninth level dispell, one that takes the place of the disjunction spell. Because that spell is hideous. For my reason's I'll quote why someone else thought it was good (or at least powerful, which it is).

ChrisHaines said:
I disagree.
I think Mordenkainen's Disjunction is a very powerful spell. It acts like a Dispel Magic with a 40' radius burst with an automatic dispel, no rolling involved. Not only that, it can possibly dispel magic items permamently with a failed Will save. Oh, and don't forget the ultimate feature, it can even destroy an artifact! Of course you potentially piss off a divine being in doing so.

I've got a ninth level dispell with works like MDJ, but instead of destroying items it suppresses them for several days (as if they failed against a dispell).

I keep MDJ in the game, but only as a spell to attempt to destroy an artifact. Any other use WILL displease the most powerful god (the GM).

Cyberzombie said:
Your dislike of "Mordenkainen's Twinky DM Spell to Mess up the PCs for no Good Reason" is also lovely.

Heheh. I so agree. I stated in a game-group I'm playing with my opinion on this spell... that I'll leave any game that the GM uses it in unless 1) There's a very good story reason 2) or a good game mechanic reason, and the GM really needs to talk with me about it first, so I won't be caught thinking he's just screwing with me.

I meantioned it when I meantioned what I'd do as a GM if any of them ever used the spell "inappropriately" (since I'd let them access the spell if they wanted) ... which is that I'd throw in several sorcs with a grudge against the PC's, all of whom know and cast MDJ regularly. Sometimes just on a fly-by.

"You see two robed figures. Both are casting. They get surprise, roll initiative"

"OK, on the surprise round the first one gets off a MDJ... the second one touches the first and casts teleport... they're both gone."

PC's "Why'd you make us roll initiative?"
Me: "I was screwing with you."
PC's: "Where'd they go, who were they?"
Me: "You don't know."

The most messed up spell ever.

ARandomGod · May 18, 2005

Baronovan said:
Anybody have any concerns on the exclusionary power of the spell? Or on the spell itself?

Hrmm... no, I think the exclusionary option makes it more of a ninth level spell. Otherwise it needs a power boost if all it does is allow a higher caster level cap. This opinion may very well also have something to do with the fact that I don't play above level 20...