What kind of cracked out spell is this?

[Cheiromancer]

The only thing that stands between Assay Resistance and being completely overpowered, is, that it is only good against a single opponent.

But it's really much better, than Spell Penetration and makes Spell Resistance kinda irrelevant for the big nasties you encounter.

OTOH, I consider Lower Spell Resistance and its cousin Spell Vulnerability to be mediocre spells at best. They are only good for cohorts and weakish support-type casters, if you have multiple casters (like 3+, including the one who casts the spell) in the party.

Bye
Thanee

I don't understand. The way Spell Vulnerability is described, it is superior to Assay Resistance. Up to -15 to SR against all casters. Assay Resistance only helps the caster, and is capped at -10. I don't have access to my books, so I must be missing something. What is it?

 

[Infiniti2000]

I also think you have to have the target of Assay Resistance in sight, so you lose a round right there.

You lose no round because assay resistance is a swift action.

So - if your archmage ALWAYS prepares assay resistance, then it's because he obviously doesn't feel that any of his other 4th level spells are worth the time. Which would seem to suggest that every opponent and his buddy has SR. Which in itself is a "screw the magic user over" sort of scenario. Having a spell to help with that isn't a terrible thing.

I don't know if you've noticed, but archmages get a not just a few 4th level slots. Always leaving two for assay resistance for the BBEG and his nearest cohort isn't much of a waste, even should they not actually have SR. But, really, at CR14-17, there are bound to be bad guys with SR, if not the BBEG, then his summoned maralith.

 

[Saeviomagy]

I don't know if you've noticed, but archmages get a not just a few 4th level slots. Always leaving two for assay resistance for the BBEG and his nearest cohort isn't much of a waste, even should they not actually have SR. But, really, at CR14-17, there are bound to be bad guys with SR, if not the BBEG, then his summoned maralith.

Wrong name you're quoting there, but nevermind.

An archmage is still probably only walking about with 6 or so 4th level slots.

And it's not like 4th level spells are totally useless to a high level character.

If you're investing 2 slots on a spell that's only useful when you hit a spell-resistanced individual that you have no other spells to use on, then it would seem that spell resistance is quite a lot more common than the average.

Also - something I just noticed. I believe that the second level spell nondetection can somewhat thwart assay resistance...

 

[Thanee]

I don't understand. The way Spell Vulnerability is described, it is superior to Assay Resistance. Up to -15 to SR against all casters. Assay Resistance only helps the caster, and is capped at -10. I don't have access to my books, so I must be missing something. What is it?

The action needed to cast the spell.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

But even then, the restriction is nearly non-existent.

Not if you play CotSQ.

The archmage in my party ALWAYS has two assay resistances available. Always. When someone ALWAYS prepares a spell, I start to recognize a problem.

My sorceress always has like... uhm... 20 or so ready.
She still does not use them all the time... spells deplete pretty fast otherwise.

If it was a 1 action spell, I think it would be okay, perhaps also with a reduction to +5 on the check. Or maybe just with the +5.

A reduction to the bonus could work, but the action really has to be swift for the spell to be useful. With a standard action it turns from a great spell to a lousy spell in one step.

The problem with lowering an opponent's SR is that it quickly unbalances the higher level spells that have no saves and only SR. Suddenly, there's nothing at all keeping such spells in check. Assay resistance was definitely not created with an eye towards core balance.

That might be. But if you look at the Archmage (Spell Power) already and then throw in Spell Penetration, which works against all opponents all the time, and some other bonus(es) to caster level, SR is nearly no hindrance, anyways, at high levels.

Actually, looking at that Take 10 on caster level checks feat in CA (name eludes me right now) and the no SR spells in there, they also might have realized, that SR is a bit too tough against spellcasters on a large number of monsters.

Bye
Thanee

 

[irdeggman]

I'm with the school that thiinks if the archmage is always preparing 2 of those spells then there is a reason for it. IMO you, the DM, are setting him up to do it, that is they are really useful in the situations the party is being placed into.

So. . .if you don't like that then change the situations. Either increase the number of opponents per encounter (several lesser baddies vice a single big baddie) or have them be creatures/NPCs that don't rely on SR - like say a high level fighter or monk that can close on the archmage rather quickly and pretty much negate his presence if he didn't prepare sufficient protection spells.

Or better yet, mix up the encounter styles to keep the players from gettting complacent.

 

[Li Shenron]

The action needed to cast the spell.

Nothing else? What about the spell duration, for how long do SV and AR last?

To me both spells seem quite too good to be only 3rd and 4th even if the duration is 1 round / level. I would have preferred them to have a single round duration or maybe 2! Or otherwise to last only until the next spell is cast, in a way similar to True Strike.

How can the longer casting time alone (which of course is a penalty by itself) make up for:
- spell working with other casters too
- higher cap
- penalty to ST
- 1 level lower
...there must be some other difference unmentioned yet.

Anyway, what bothers me most is the penalty to ST. Equal to your caster level? How can possibly someone resist this spell after a few levels?

 

[Thanee]

The saving throw penalty is silly, yes. They should have made it no save to begin with.

The casting time... you need to cast this spell in combat, no preparing. That's one wasted round with a huge chance of losing the spell, if you are attacked.

The stuff you listed nowhere balances the 1 round casting time, when comparing with AR.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Li Shenron]

I suppose I just cannot follow you on any account...

But I should really read the exact description to understand how AR can possibly be superior.

 

[reveal]

Assay Resistance
Sor/Wiz4
Swift Action
Lasts 1 round/level
No Saving Throw or SR
Gives you +10 to caster level checks to defeat a single creatures SR, per casting, as long as you can see the creature when you cast the spell.

Spell Vulnerability
Sor/Wiz3
1 round casting time
Lasts 1 min/level
No SR
Fort negates
Reduces a creatures SR by -1 per caster level. Cannot lower it below 0. The target takes a penalty on the saving throw equal to your caster level.

I, too, don't see how AR is better. SV lasts a lot longer and allows everyone to affect it who has magical abilities (spells, wands, etc). And while it may not be a swift action, this spell, especially at higher levels, can be extremely deadly with quickened spells or the like.