PDA

View Full Version : (3.5, Spell) What's Yours is Mine (PEACH)



DracoDei
2009-06-23, 10:41 AM
Control Magic I
Transmutation
Level: Brd 4, Cleric 4, Magic 4, Sor/Wiz 4
Components: V, S, M, F, DF
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target: One spellcaster, creature, or object
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: No
As per Dispel Magic except that you gain control of the spell(s), instead of simply dispersing or preventing them, and the Area Dispel function may not be used. If used as a counterspell, you must successfully identify the specific spell being cast in order to use this spell. You may then do anything with that spell you could do if you were the caster (including targeting a spell that you successfully controlled as it was being cast, or dismissing it). The DC of the opposed check increases as follows:

Arcane casting used to try to control a Divine spell or vice-versa +1?
Spell not on your list of spells known +1
Spell has an alignment descriptor directly opposing your own alignment +2/each
Spell has an alignment descriptor that you do not share +1/each (Does NOT stack with the above)

If the spell has a certain range within which it can be controlled or targeted, use the range of Control Magic as calculated from your position (not the position of the original caster).


Control Magic II
Transmutation
Level: Cleric 5, Magic 5, Sor/Wiz 5
This spell functions like control magic I, except that the maximum caster level on your control check is +13 instead of +10.


Control Magic Bardic
Transmutation
Level: Brd 5
This spell functions like control magic I, except that the maximum caster level on your control check is +15 instead of +10.


Control Magic III
Transmutation
Level: Cleric 6, Magic 6, Sor/Wiz 6
This spell functions like control magic I, except that the maximum caster level on your control check is +16 instead of +10.


Control Magic IV
Transmutation
Level: Brd 6, Cleric 7, Magic 7, Sor/Wiz 7
This spell functions like control magic, except that the maximum caster level on your control check is +20 instead of +10.

Additionally, greater control magic has a chance to control any effect that remove curse can remove, even if dispel magic canít dispel that effect.





Are the spell levels good?

Is this too good of a substitute for specialist wizards who ban abjuration? (Much like someone who bans Evocation might pick up Shadow Evocation.)

Am I right not to give this to Druids? It just doesn't feel very Druid-y for some reason...

Should clerics even get this appart from as a Domain spell?

What non-core classes should get this and at what level?

What about a 10th or 11th level version of this that is to Control Magic what Mage's Disjunction is to Dispel Magic?

I got a suggestion that divine casters shouldn't be able to control spells that are opposed to their alignment on one or both axes. What say you?

Notes for POSSIBLE future changes:

[20:06] ailurus: I would suggest the following changes - in the event of a tie, the target spell just fizzles (as per dispel magic) rather than being controlled. but, also, maybe tack on a default +1 modifier on the target spell's caster level

DracoDei
2011-01-02, 09:58 AM
Did you know that (only in the homebrew forums?) it is permissible to bump a thread one started no matter how old it is?

Zeta Kai
2011-01-02, 10:59 AM
Did you know that (only in the homebrew forums?) it is permissible to bump a thread one started no matter how old it is?

No, is that true?

JoshuaZ
2011-01-02, 11:14 AM
Is this too good of a substitute for specialist wizards who ban abjuration

I'm not sure. I'd be worried that transmutation is already one of the stronger schools so this would make a transmuter who banned abjuration very strong.


Am I right not to give this to Druids? It just doesn't feel very Druid-y for some reason..

You are right. It feels very wizardy.


Should clerics even get this appart from as a Domain spell?

As I said, feels very wizardy, so I'd rather not give it to clerics wholesale. But adding new domains is tough. Instead maybe have the spell level be one higher for clerics than for wizard but allow clerics with the magic domain to prepare them at the wizard level? Then you don't need to be in the weird position of adding spells to a domain (I think there is an official precedent of spells which have slightly different effects based on the domain of the caster, but I don't remember off the top of my head. The closest I can think of is how in Dragon Magic some spells behave differently for Dragonblooded casters).

I'm a little concerned about the large number of different spells with slightly different maximums. That allows a lot more careful optimization (in contrast dispel magic has only two versions). I'm not sure how much of an actual problem this is.


What about a 10th or 11th level version of this that is to Control Magic what Mage's Disjunction is to Dispel Magic?

Do most people play with higher level spells beyond 9th? I don't play epic often but my impression is that most people just use the standard system which uses those slots only for metamagic of low level spells.


I would suggest the following changes - in the event of a tie, the target spell just fizzles (as per dispel magic) rather than being controlled. but, also, maybe tack on a default +1 modifier on the target spell's caster level

This seems reasonable but possibly overly complicated

Kobold-Bard
2011-01-02, 11:40 AM
No, is that true?

Only if you are the creator and you did so with the intent of adding or changing something, rather than just bumping for the sake of hoping someone else will post.

DracoDei
2011-01-03, 12:16 PM
I'm not sure. I'd be worried that transmutation is already one of the stronger schools so this would make a transmuter who banned abjuration very strong.



You are right. It feels very wizardy.
Ok, no druids then.

As I said, feels very wizardy, so I'd rather not give it to clerics wholesale. But adding new domains is tough. Instead maybe have the spell level be one higher for clerics than for wizard but allow clerics with the magic domain to prepare them at the wizard level? Then you don't need to be in the weird position of adding spells to a domain (I think there is an official precedent of spells which have slightly different effects based on the domain of the caster, but I don't remember off the top of my head.
I think I have seen spells added to a domain... might have been in a book, might have been around here. Your idea is very much worth considering.

The closest I can think of is how in Dragon Magic some spells behave differently for Dragonblooded casters).
In Draconomicon Sorcerers get +1 CL for certain of the spells.

I'm a little concerned about the large number of different spells with slightly different maximums. That allows a lot more careful optimization (in contrast dispel magic has only two versions). I'm not sure how much of an actual problem this is.
As you may have already figured out that is because they have to start out a level higher than Dispel Magic (OK, so you can't do Area Dispels, it is still better). If one keeps the bonus cap, one runs out of cap before you can get to the second of a two-version model, thus the multiple versions (including a special one for bards). I suppose I could up the cap on the first version and go to a two-version model (or three with the middle one still being bard only).

Do most people play with higher level spells beyond 9th?
No, no they do not. This, however, is the homebrew forums. We break conventions (somewhere between very occasionally, and every fourth post).

I don't play epic often but my impression is that most people just use the standard system which uses those slots only for metamagic of low level spells.
(Nods)

This seems reasonable but possibly overly complicated
Yeah... "Optional rule" maybe? AKA passing the buck...




Only if you are the creator and you did so with the intent of adding or changing something, rather than just bumping for the sake of hoping someone else will post.

No such limitation regarding "content added"/intent seems to be specified.

Thread Necromancy
Bringing a thread back from "the dead." If a thread hasn't been posted in within the last six weeks, don't reply to it. Start a new topic, if you want to discuss the subject (you are welcome to link to the old thread). If you think it would be better to resurrect an old thread, PM a moderator for that subforum and wait for approval. The original poster of a creation in Homebrew (and only that poster) may revive a creation beyond the six-week threshold without prior Moderator approval.
Bolding mine.

FWIW, tbis is only the second time I have done this sort of bump, and, for me, it is only for stuff that originally received NO response. The only time I REMEMBER anyone else using it was Vorpal Tribble bringing back a seasonal thread or two (Christmas last year maybe?).

Zeta Kai
2011-01-03, 04:38 PM
No such limitation regarding "content added"/intent seems to be specified.

Huh. Interesting. I never knew that I could do that.