PDA

View Full Version : Spell Absorbing (S.H.I.O)



Zeful
2006-05-17, 04:26 PM
Spell Absorbing: This weapon acts as a magnet, drawing spells or spell-like abilities into itself. The magic absorbed must be a single-target spell or a ray directed at either the character possessing the weapon or her gear. The weapon then nullifies the spellís effect and stores its potential until the wielder releases this energy in the form of spells of her own. She can instantly detect a spellís level as the weapon absorbs that spellís energy. Absorption requires no action on the part of the user if the weapon is in hand at the time. For every spell level held, up to ten (10), the weapon gains a +1 to damage. The extra damage lasts for 1min.
Strong Abjuration; CL15; Craft Magic Arms and Armor; Spell Turning, Caster must be at least 15th level; Price +4bonus

What do you think?
EDIT: Mistake

SHIO stands for:
Supportive and
Helpful
Input
Only

Darkie
2006-05-17, 05:11 PM
Hm, seems overpowered.

In the sense that it's +4.

This is essentially a Rod of Absorbtion built into the weapon.

Consider:
A minor ring of energy resistance is 12000gp.
Putting on a minor energy resistance on armor is +18000gp.

Major is 28000gp.
On armor is +42000gp.

Greater is 44000gp.
On armor is +66000gp.

Looks like on armor is 3/2 the cost of the ring.

Rod of Spell Absorbtion is 50000gp. On armor (well, a weapon) it should be +75000gp, not a piddly +4 (Which is +24000 or +48000 at it's cheapest).

Gyrfalcon
2006-05-17, 05:15 PM
There should also be a max cap on the amount of damage that can be gained and held, otherwise I can see such abuse with a set of supporting casters blasting you with ray spells so you do 1d8+50 damage per strike.

Darkie
2006-05-17, 05:17 PM
Oh, that's right, unlike the Rod there's no limitations, is there? That's not right.

Zeful
2006-05-17, 05:29 PM
I forgot to put it in but it has a ten spell level limitation and you can't cast spells from that energy. That make more sense?

Gyrfalcon
2006-05-17, 05:40 PM
What happens if you get whacked for more then ten spell levels? Does it no longer absorb the excess spells at that point? Is there danger of explosion?

The Glyphstone
2006-05-17, 05:47 PM
Since it's only a +4 bonus, I strongly suggest altering it to provide a +1 bonus per 2 levels stored..that stops pseudo-Epic cheeziness at non-Epic levels.

Or, at least make it an enhancement bonus to damage, so it doesn't stack with the weapon's natural enhancement.

Zeful
2006-05-17, 05:48 PM
It just stops absorbing spells, they effect you normally after that point.

EDIT: Glyphstone the ten extra damage isn't (or shouldn't) modified by crits it is literly ten extra points of damage but you eather get attacked by ten (or less) spells or waste that many to gain damage (if you were going to do that anyway Arcane Strike has a higher damage potential.

Darkie
2006-05-17, 11:46 PM
Since it's only a +4 bonusNo, no, no. It should not be only a +4. It should be at least a +50000.

Forget any benefits other than absorbtion of spells. Even if you can just absorb 10 levels, that's a Finger of Death, or a Harm, or a Disintegrate, or any number of level 9 spells tha's instantly negated.

This cannot be a + equivilant. It's 50000 for a +5 weapon.
If we go purely by emulating the rules for turning persistant effect rings into armor enchantments, simulating the rod of spell absorbtion is 75000, which means the cheapest is 77000.

Going by wealth guidelines (and no more than half wealth in one item), that's 100000 and 154000 wealth levels respectively, a difference of levels 13, and 15.

More Importantly, the Rod of Absorbtion is one use only, by which I mean it discharges, and that's it. It can absorb up to 50 spell levels, and it can discharge 50, and that's it. You can't absorb more than 50.

This is uncapped in use. I cannot place enough emphasis on how a '+4' cost is not enough.

Orion-the-G
2006-05-17, 11:58 PM
I agree with jeff here.

First and foremost you're going from a 50 charge maximum to an unlimited charge maximum.

based on magic item creation rules that doubles the price (to being worth 100,000)

Not only that, but you are combining a weapon and a seperate effect. Like jeff pointed out, this is not free. Based on the armor rules, we're looking at a 50% increase in cost.

So at the very least it's a +150,000 gp increase. Not to mention the damage bonus you can gain from the spells stored.

So either a +150,000 cost modification to the weapon (no +x enhancement) or at least +8 enhancement bonus...the only enhancement that promises you will not get the weapon extra cheap.

Zeful
2006-05-18, 12:21 AM
Okay than give me a situation where this weapon as I described is as unbalanced as you say.

Orion-the-G
2006-05-18, 12:24 AM
Very well.

+1 dagger of Absorbtion.

cost: 50,000 gp.

The cost of a rod of absorbtion: 50,000 gp.

Not only does the dagger function just like a rod of absorbtion, but it has no upper limit on it's maximum spells absorbed. AND it can be used as a weapon (which gets better the more it's absorbed).

You have created a Rod of Absorbtion with unlimited charges with the exact same cost as a normal rod of absorbtion. Not only that, but it has extra abilities.

Done.

Zeful
2006-05-18, 01:25 AM
Really good point.

But unlike the rod of absorbtion a spellcaster cannot cast spells out of it, which was one of it's greatest abilities.

How would you suggest that I change it so that it's still a +4 price bonus?

Orion-the-G
2006-05-18, 02:28 AM
Well, then there has been some misunderstanding:


Spell Absorbing: This weapon acts as a magnet, drawing spells or spell-like abilities into itself. The magic absorbed must be a single-target spell or a ray directed at either the character possessing the weapon or her gear. The weapon then nullifies the spellís effect and stores its potential until the wielder releases this energy in the form of spells of her own. She can instantly detect a spellís level as the weapon absorbs that spellís energy. Absorption requires no action on the part of the user if the weapon is in hand at the time. For every spell level held, up to ten (10), the weapon gains a +1 to damage. The extra damage lasts for 1min.

Orion-the-G
2006-05-18, 03:35 AM
Just to provide a bit more help than the last post:

First and foremost, there needs to be a bit more definition of the ability:

1) what happens once 10 spell levels have been absorbed?
2) What happens if a spell can only be partially absorbed?
3) Do the spell levels 'free up' after one minute? Do they need to be tracked seperately?


But just looking at it...It is very hard to say, but it honestly still seems overpowered. It grants immunity to many, many spells and even with it's much lower charge 'limit' it can be used over and over again, unlike the rod of absorbtion.

Also, if you know you are facing non-magic user enemies it woudln't be unreasonable for a sorcerer or (even worse) a warlock to 'pump' up the spells in the weapon. +10 to damage is nothing to sneeze at, even if it's defensive properties are far stronger.

I'm afraid I can't make a decent suggestion for what +x or gp value it should be. But please keep in mind that this is a VERY powerful effect. At the very least it seems like it should be +5. I'd take Absorbption over Vorpal any day of the week.

Zeful
2006-05-18, 09:59 AM
Okay I just copied pasted from the rod of absorbtion. As for your concerns:

1.) when full it stops affecting spells period
2.) A spell cannot be partially absorbed it's all or nothing. (i'm thinking of and overload type effect to add so when this happens all the spell energy is released should this occur, think boom)
3.) from when the first spell is abdorbed is when the countdown starts, so its easier to track.

Now a to hit mechanic could be added so the spell could be asorbed Ac15+spell level might work.

Kord
2006-05-18, 10:12 AM
Fuel, fuel, fuel, the heated debate.

I think it should be more around 100,000 to 125,000, not 150,000. *Double the price would be sufficient.

You could either lower the amount of spell levels it absorbs (say 8 or 7), or make it so that it could not cast spells back out.

EDIT: Or the ^ (or something similar to it)

Parallax
2006-05-18, 10:58 AM
Here are some suggestions to get the item to a +4 level while keeping (some of) the function:

- Limit the absorbtion to low-level spell. Say 3rd level spells or lower. Anything above that is unabsorbed.

- Don't allow the spells absorbed to be used to cast other spells.

- Limit the enhancement bonus to a +1 unnamed bonus to hit and damage, regardless of the spell level absorbed.

- Limit the duration of damage enhancement to 1 min, or until discharged. Any attack with the weapon discharges it, whether the attack hits or not.

- Absorbing a spell while the weapon is charged resets the charge, no accumulation.

- Alternatively, the absorption property does not work while the weapon is charged. In other words, if the weapon absorbs a quickened light directed at the wielder, it doesn't affect the scorching ray that follows.

I would recommend picking most of these or others you can come up with. Any one limitation will take the price down a bit, but not much, you definitely need several.

Zeful
2006-05-18, 12:37 PM
Okay so taking a few suggestions from the list Parallax provided. It's going to look something like this.


Spell absorbing: A weapon with this property acts like a magnet, drawing spells or spell-like abilities into itself. The magic absorbed must be a single-target spell or a ray directed at either the character possessing this weapon or her gear. The weapon then nullifies the spell's effect and stories its potential until the next successful attack; or until one minute has elasped. Absorbtion requiers no action on the part of the user if the weapon is in hand at the time. Only spells up to third level may be absorbed and the weapon can only stop one spell at a time. When charged the weapon provides a +1 bonus to damage for each level of the absobed spell.
Strong Abjuration; CL15; Craft Magic Arms and Armor; Spell Turning, Caster must be at least 15th level; Price +4 bonus

How about this then?

Zeful
2006-05-19, 03:04 PM
Any body got any opinions?

StarWarz2
2006-05-19, 04:02 PM
Looks much better.

One question though, just for clarification - this will still absorb a Quickened Fireball, yes? but not a Heightened Fireball?


Caster must be at least 15th level;

This is redundant. :) You state the Caster Level of 15, already. That's what the CL is, the minimum Caster Level to be able to supply this enhancement.

Zeful
2006-05-19, 04:40 PM
The CL is the average caster level of the creator, spell turing is a seventh level spell so a 13th level wizard could create this item without that prerequisitate. It's there for a reason. And no it won't absorb a meta-magicked third level spell unless it has a 0 spell level adjustment

The Glyphstone
2006-05-19, 05:02 PM
Actually, I believe the default CL for a weapon enhancement is 3x the bonus...though that might be for attack/damage bonuses only...

Darkie
2006-05-19, 10:37 PM
Spell Resistance 17 on a shield is a +4 modifier.
Spell Resistance 19 is a +5.

Of course, Armor prices are different from weapon prices by a factor of 2...

So, a hypothetical to everyone out there:

Looking a the weapon +4 abilities, we have Dancing and Brilliant Energy.

Brilliant Energy ignores Armor and Shield bonuss - but at the same time does absolute nothing to undead, constructs, and objects.

Dancing lets it fight for four rounds on its own with a standard action, freeing the user's hand for something.


So, you have 50000gp to make a +5 equivilant weapon, what would you do?