What Spells give the DM the most headache...

[Eldragon]

Sounds like you got railroaded into doing a job you weren't ready for Felon... Never a pleasent experience! I think you need to talk to your players about this, see if you can get them to see your things from your point of view. Consider if you should simply end your current campaign and start a new one?

You seem to have a very high and lofty sense of what a DM should be. I will speak from personal experience, and observations. Perhaps I may bring your opinion of DMing back into the real world.

I play with 6 other players who each passed the bar exam on DnD Rule Law. Among all the players, at least one copy of every WotC produced book is owned. I read most of them, skimmed the rest. Many other d20 books are also available. So in short, many books are floating around my house. As the DM, I focus on developing the plot, and planning where my PCs may go astray from said plot. My players on the other hand, have time to read each of these books, and focus on how these books have feats and spells that affect their characters. I read my players character sheets, and read the spell descriptions. However I fail to read into the ramifications of combining certain spells with feats (henceforth called the Killer-Combo).

Jolly Giant may see this as a shortcoming in my own DMing ability. And would probably reccommend I scrap my campaign and stick to low level campaigns. In order for a DM to have a counter prepared for every Killer-Combo a PC may have available to him must spend equal time reseaching the PC as the player in question. This is assuming the Player and the DM are both equally qualified Rules Lawyers and equally intelligent. The player spends time looking for the right/feats and spells to make a killer-combo, the DM must then read the character sheet and find the killer-combo himself, then devise an encounter that exploits a weakness in the killer-combo. The preceding can be a lot of fun, and it is what I enjoy about being a DM. Unfortunately there are some spells and feats that are just plain unbalanced. Killer-combos that do not have a sensible counter. The 3.0 Scry-Teleport assasination was one such killer-combo. Yes, there are counters to it, but who wants to play in a game where everyone is hiding inside rooms lined with lead, only venturing forth for the duration of thier improved invisibility spell?

The argument "If you can't handle X spell, then you are a bad DM" has been on these boards since their inception. I remember when people were saying that very argument with the 3.0 haste.

The DM should not be the person who has total mastery of the rules, owns every book, memorized every line in the errata. The DM just needs to tell a good story, and know a basic understanding of the rules. A DM should not need to spend several hours a day developing counters to every killer-combo.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Your post ignores several of the relevant facts Eldragon.

First, most DMs do not simply allow material from any published D20 book--or even every WotC published book--into their games. That in itself controls the development of the so-called killer combo. If you, as a DM allow any feat or spell that someone put together in a netbook or published in Relics and Rituals XXIV into your game, you can expect to have problems. Most DMs exercise a bit more control than that.

Second, since players generally only have one character each, their number of "killer combos" is a limited quantity. Since they generally play with the same DM on an ongoing basis, their killer combos become a known quantity as well. (And it's perfectly realistic for them to become a part of the characters' reputations like Sampson or Heracles' great strength, Ulysses' cunning, and Achilles' invulnerability became a part of theirs. Thus no DM has to develop counters to every "killer combo"--only to the ones his players actually has.

Third, you ignore the fact that some "killer combos" are more devastating and more widely applicable than others. For instance, the 3.0 Whirlwind Attack+Great Cleave combo (which I didn't actually think was that bad) only worked when the PC was surrounded by a large number of weak creatures and one or two strong ones. (Or when the PC had a keen vorpal weapon, Imp Crit, and Weapon master levels). Every now and then it will work and the player will feel skilled and important; more often than not, said PC will be facing smaller groups who aren't surrounding him, groups of tough creatures, most of whom don't go down with one blow, creatures smiting him with flyby attack and spring attack, and other foes who aren't vulnerable to his schtick. Some combos are more broadly applicable than others but most aren't universally applicable.

Finally, the DM has an unlimited number of NPCs with far less limited choices than the players do and has the ability to use material from any source at will or just to make stuff up. Consequently, any killer combo the players develop is ripe for stealing by the DM and using against them and the DM can make up killer combos of his own. Furthermore, NPCs aren't nearly as resource limited as PCs. (An NPC can generally afford to blow all his spells and consumables in one battle because it's likely to be his last so there's no point in saving something for later; PCs generally presume that there might be a second encounter and need to be more frugal). The biggest compaints I heard about 3.0 haste actually fell into this category rather than the other "My DM hit me with nine DC 55 fireballs before my initiative came up."

 

[Eldragon]

First, most DMs do not simply allow material from any published D20 book--or even every WotC published book--into their games. That in itself controls the development of the so-called killer combo. If you, as a DM allow any feat or spell that someone put together in a netbook or published in Relics and Rituals XXIV into your game, you can expect to have problems. Most DMs exercise a bit more control than that.

I do not allow everything from every book. In fact my policy is anything outside the core books is assumed to be not-allowed, and spells/feats are only added by player request and DM approval. I agree, It controls development of killer-combos a great deal. But it does not eliminate them. Often times one spell alone is balanced, but in groups there becomes a problem. I am not going to disallow one spell because it can be used in combination with some other feat to devastating effect. For example. Keen Edge is balanced, Improved Critical is balanced, Weapon Master is balanced; but a weaponmaster using a keen rapier and having the improved critical feat is pretty gruesome, and many believe this lead to the change in the spell description to Keen Edge in 3.5.

Second, since players generally only have one character each, their number of "killer combos" is a limited quantity. Since they generally play with the same DM on an ongoing basis, their killer combos become a known quantity as well. (And it's perfectly realistic for them to become a part of the characters' reputations like Sampson or Heracles' great strength, Ulysses' cunning, and Achilles' invulnerability became a part of theirs. Thus no DM has to develop counters to every "killer combo"--only to the ones his players actually has.

I agree entirely. Certain combos give a character a lot flair. I like to play a fighter/mage that uses the following string of feats/spells: Spring Attack+ Power Attack+Arcane Strike+True-Strike. A fun combo, but a rare combo. Not a whole lot of people would use. But when everyone uses the same combo, it stops becoming flair and becomes commonplace and IMHO annoying. The Scry-Teleport assasination is one such example. Pretty much every campaign with players over lvl 10 do this tactic at least once.

Third, you ignore the fact that some "killer combos" are more devastating and more widely applicable than others. For instance, the 3.0 Whirlwind Attack+Great Cleave combo (which I didn't actually think was that bad) only worked when the PC was surrounded by a large number of weak creatures and one or two strong ones. (Or when the PC had a keen vorpal weapon, Imp Crit, and Weapon master levels). Every now and then it will work and the player will feel skilled and important; more often than not, said PC will be facing smaller groups who aren't surrounding him, groups of tough creatures, most of whom don't go down with one blow, creatures smiting him with flyby attack and spring attack, and other foes who aren't vulnerable to his schtick. Some combos are more broadly applicable than others but most aren't universally applicable.

I made the mistake of implying that every combo is a killer-combo. Some combinations are certainly not game breaking. When I say Killer-Como, I mean combinations that are nearly universally useful. A druid using Transmute metal to wood, and repel wood to Send a PC party off a cliff to thier deaths is also certainly powerful, but really only useful to a druid who lives at the top of a cliff. However Scry-Teleport is nearly always useful, and can be applied heavily by a party as low a level as 9.

Finally, the DM has an unlimited number of NPCs with far less limited choices than the players do and has the ability to use material from any source at will or just to make stuff up. Consequently, any killer combo the players develop is ripe for stealing by the DM and using against them and the DM can make up killer combos of his own.

Sure the DM can steal ideas from a party, and I have an aweful lot of fun doing it. In fact I usually reverse a combo back on the PCs, and let them come up with the counter to the killer-combo. Sometimes the players can't come up with a solution to thier own combo. IMHO, when the game degenerates to the same combos being used again and again by PC and DM alike, with no counter being devised, something is wrong in the system. A house rule needs to be written.

Furthermore, NPCs aren't nearly as resource limited as PCs. (An NPC can generally afford to blow all his spells and consumables in one battle because it's likely to be his last so there's no point in saving something for later; PCs generally presume that there might be a second encounter and need to be more frugal). The biggest compaints I heard about 3.0 haste actually fell into this category rather than the other "My DM hit me with nine DC 55 fireballs before my initiative came up."

I feel this postulate falls in to the category of "Every campaign is different". Since the DM's power is limitless, and the party makeup infinitly varied. In other words, in my campaign we do it this way. My NPCs tend to try and survive an encounter with PCs. Thus use all thier best spells right away, and when losing the battle they run away. The PCs follow the same strategy with NPC encounters. Neither side uses the concept of cannon fodder (Thats what summoning is for).

 

[der_kluge]

For me, the spells that generate the biggest headache are the ones that last multiple rounds and cause dice to be rolled every subsequent round.

Prayer/Bless are problematic, because once they are active, everyone is always forgetting to add those bonuses, and as DM, I'm always forgetting to subtract them.

Confusion is just a mess.

Blur/Displacement is really annoying to remember to roll miss chances.

Maybe it's just our group, but we're always forgetting to roll ray ranged touch attacks. This has actually produced two humorous moments in our game. The first was when I attempted to hit a player with a scorching ray. "You take 21 points of damage. No save. Isn't that insane?" And then another player looked it up, "oh, you forgot to roll a ranged touch attack. That's a ray." Me - "oh, you're right. That makes the spell a bit more reasonable I suppose, but I shouldn't have any problem.." *rolls a 1 - everyone laughs* - Me *head on table*.

But then the other night, the wizard casts enervation on a beholder and looks at me and says "it loses 4 levels" all cocky like. Me *confused, thinking that the spell was just too powerful, so I looked it up.* "Oh, you need to roll a to-hit" Player-"Oh, that shouldn't be a prob..." *rolls a 1, everyone laughs*

 

[Sammael]

As mentioned, teleport. I don't have too much trouble with scry, possibly because the PCs were scried on so much that they now loathe the spell to the point of not using it themselves.

Briar web. Had to ban that one.

Finally, anything from Monte Cook's Book of Eldritch Might. As good as he is at writing some other things, Monte couldn't balance a spell if his life depended on it. Some of his spells are so horribly munchkiny that I am even hesitant to have my NPCs use them.

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

I feel creeping horror about the spell Divination, just because it always seems to come up right when I'm not feeling up to the challenge of inventing a good answer for it.

I'm utterly appalled by Feeblemind. Holy crap, that spell is so completely evil, I'm ashamed that it was my wizard's first pick for 5th level spells. If it had a duration or was curable by less than a 6th level spell, I don't think it would terrify me so much, even with the added penalty for arcane casters. Ugh.

And while it's not a thoroughly disgusting spell, I'm going to bet that my current GM is beginning to hate me for using the 3rd level spell Chains of Binding out of Relics and Rituals 2. If the target fails a Ref save, he gets rocked for lvl*d6 damage (max 10D6) and is grappled for a round per level by nasty 20+ Str hooked chains. Of all the bad guys that spell has been cast on who failed the save, only one didn't die in them, and that's just because he was an ogre mage and Gaseous Formed his ass out of it. But all the rest, even the hasted undead mage who nearly got a TPK in the first round, were shut down permanently by this spell.

I'm waiting for him to unleash the onslaught of Escape Artist-using mega-grapplers in an attempt to get me to stop using the spell so much.

--
before feeblemind came along, chains of binding was my main mage-killer spell
ryan

 

[der_kluge]

I feel creeping horror about the spell Divination, just because it always seems to come up right when I'm not feeling up to the challenge of inventing a good answer for it.

I'm utterly appalled by Feeblemind. Holy crap, that spell is so completely evil, I'm ashamed that it was my wizard's first pick for 5th level spells. If it had a duration or was curable by less than a 6th level spell, I don't think it would terrify me so much, even with the added penalty for arcane casters. Ugh.

And while it's not a thoroughly disgusting spell, I'm going to bet that my current GM is beginning to hate me for using the 3rd level spell Chains of Binding out of Relics and Rituals 2. If the target fails a Ref save, he gets rocked for lvl*d6 damage (max 10D6) and is grappled for a round per level by nasty 20+ Str hooked chains. Of all the bad guys that spell has been cast on who failed the save, only one didn't die in them, and that's just because he was an ogre mage and Gaseous Formed his ass out of it. But all the rest, even the hasted undead mage who nearly got a TPK in the first round, were shut down permanently by this spell.

I'm waiting for him to unleash the onslaught of Escape Artist-using mega-grapplers in an attempt to get me to stop using the spell so much.

--
before feeblemind came along, chains of binding was my main mage-killer spell
ryan

Sounds broken to me. Same damage as fireball, PLUS allows additional damage a number of rounds equal to the caster level? It sounds like a great spell - a great 4th level spell. Good thing I'm not your DM, I would have modified this one.

Already houseruled Feeblemind - removed the -4 penalty.

 

[Sejs]

Same damage as fireball, PLUS allows additional damage a number of rounds equal to the caster level?

Single target spell, though, as opposed to Fireball and Lightning Bolt being AoE. *shrug*

"I wish I had a million gold coins."

A sizeable pile of gold coins appear at your feet. Examining the coins, you find they're completely blank; no stamp or mint markings on them, just plain discs of gold, each the size of a gold piece...

"I wish I was stronger than a dragon"

Let's see here... you're Chaotic Good and how old is your character? 27? Alright, and what's your strength currently? 16. Gotcha. OKay, you gain a +2 inherrant bonus to your strength, raising it to 18 - stronger than a dragon of your same alignment and age. For rules purposes, I'm gonna handle this the same was as if you've read a Manual of Gainful Excercise +2. Go ahead and mark off the 5000xp cost for the spell.

 

[Herpes Cineplex]

Same damage as fireball, PLUS allows additional damage a number of rounds equal to the caster level?

No: same damage as fireball, against one target, ONE TIME. The chains hit on the first round and do damage, after that, all they do is grapple (doing no damage).

I should've made that more clear, I guess.

--
still a wicked little spell, though

 

[Hypersmurf]

Let's see here... you're Chaotic Good and how old is your character? 27? Alright, and what's your strength currently? 16. Gotcha. OKay, you gain a +2 inherrant bonus to your strength, raising it to 18 - stronger than a dragon of your same alignment and age. For rules purposes, I'm gonna handle this the same was as if you've read a Manual of Gainful Excercise +2. Go ahead and mark off the 5000xp cost for the spell.

Which is twice the effect one would normally get from a Wish - a +1 inherent bonus.

What if the character's base Str is 11? That same 18 would require a +7 inherent bonus... and they're normally limited to +5. And even that requires 5 wishes in immediate succession.

-Hyp.