Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 1127547" data-attributes="member: 151">It really depends how far down deep you wish to drill.  The biggest limiter for any magical intereference is penetration and rarity.  How common is it for the majority of folks to get access to, social customs concerning it's use, and so forth. True Resurrection IS a powerful spell, but unless 17th level clerics have become remarkably abundant in a particular game, only a handful of beings would have access to it.  Social custom and religious restrictions might apply to such beings.  In a world where 3E's 'scry and fry' is prevalent, a king might have a compact with the highest ranking member of a local temple for such a spell...in return for favors to the 'official religion' of the kingdom.  The high-priest always keeps a True Res memmed just in case an emergency occurs. For the truly powerful and/or paranoid, ruling from a personal demi-plane that is not coterminous with the astral or ethereal is much better.  No nasty teleports, etherealness or other spells making your life inconvienent. Powerful (read:RICH) rulers would probably petition powerful arcanists for Rings of Contingency, with specific enchantments to protect them in times of need.  The mage of my party has a triple threat on his ring, so that should he be dominated, a targeted dispel will go off ON HIM, a teleport will fire (taking him to a safe place) and a heavy damage spell fires off after he leaves.  Imagine a ruler giving a tower and land grant to a powerful wizard for his occasional protection and the odd powerful item. Despite being based on his D&D game, Brust's Taltos series is excellent, and shows the effects of high-magic do NOT neccesarily translate into a benefit for all.  Non-noble citizens don't get the benefit of semi-immortality, for example, nor do poor nobles who can't afford the cost of a ressurections.  This creates a social imbalance, of course.   Another facet of the culture of is the societal factor of house-rotation.  There is a set pattern of secession based on the major houses, so that even the weakest or poorest house will eventually have an emperor/empress sitting atop the throne.  A typical D&D game might have a similar situation.  Imagine a PC being told by his church that he must memorize a True Res and Miracle daily, in case the church has need of his talents.  He may not be called on to use the spells, but if an emergency happens, he is expected to be available. Under 3.5, I consider Shapechange to be the most problematic spell from a rules standpoint.  It seems to be highly broken in a number of profound ways. I would highly recommend Magical Medieval Europe for a good reference on how many spells don't cause a campaign trouble, and can be quietly integrated into the campaign.  In many cases, it's merely more economical and logical to not use spells in replacement of manual labor.</blockquote>

Verification