PDA

View Full Version : Commandeer Magic (PEACH)



Lysander
2009-11-24, 01:04 AM
Commandeer Magic
Abjuration
Level: Magic 4, Sor/Wiz 4
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level)
Target: One ongoing magical effect
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: No
Spell Resistance: No

You take control of an ongoing spell or magical effect, treating it from that point on as if you cast it. If the spell is dismissible that means you have the ability to do so rather than its caster, if it can be dispelled you are guaranteed success when attempting to dispel it rather than its caster, and you are able to issue any relevant commands the spell allows rather than its caster. This does not change the spell's current target or remaining duration, nor does it grant you control that belongs to its target rather than its caster, or any other power the spell's caster does not normally have over it. Taking control of any magic with a duration of concentration instantly ends the spell.

To command a spell you must make a commandeer magic check (1d20 + your caster level, maximum +10). The DC for this commandeer check is 11 + the spellís caster level. If you succeed you take control of the spell, if you fail the spell continues unaffected. You can target a specific spell or the highest level spell affecting a target, but taking command of an unknown spell does not automatically tell you what it is. Only magic that is vulnerable to being permanently dispelled can be commandeered.

What do you think? An obvious use is seizing control of other people's summoned creatures but there are many applications.

Milskidasith
2009-11-24, 01:07 AM
So it's dispel magic but with the ability to steal buffs, and without the ability to be improved by the useful "increase my dispel check" items?

Honestly, I'd just stick to Reaving Dispel, but that is a 9th level slot.

Temotei
2009-11-24, 01:11 AM
What's the DC against commandeering a spell? You just have a random check in there, with nothing against it, as far as I can see. Also, I think this is too powerful for a 4th level spell. Imagine commandeering an extremely powerful spell. I recommend either putting a limit on the spell levels that can be commandeered, raising the DC of higher-level spells, or raising the spell level of this spell.

EDIT: Ninja'd.

Milskidasith
2009-11-24, 01:12 AM
What's the DC against commandeering a spell? You just have a random check in there, with nothing against it, as far as I can see. Also, I think this might be too powerful for a 4th level spell. Imagine commandeering an extremely powerful spell. I recommend either putting a limit on the spell levels that can be commandeered, raising the DC of higher-level spells, or raising the spell level of this spell.

It's dispel magic, so it's against the dispel magic check, most likely. It's impossible to make for anybody at higher levels with a CL boosting item or two.

Lysander
2009-11-24, 01:16 AM
So it's dispel magic but with the ability to steal buffs, and without the ability to be improved by the useful "increase my dispel check" items?

Honestly, I'd just stick to Reaving Dispel, but that is a 9th level slot.

It can't steal buffs. It doesn't switch the target of a spell, so while you could commandeer say Bull's Strength, it wouldn't stop that person from benefiting from it. And Bull's Strength isn't dismissible so you couldn't do that either. You would be guaranteed success if you tried to dispel it, but you'd be better off just dispelling it first rather than wasting a 4th leveling spell slot and a round.

So it's not useful for buff negation since casters don't retain control over the buffs they cast. What it is useful for is things like taking control of summoned monsters, animated objects, dominated creatures, arcane locks, and anything else the caster maintains ongoing control over.

Ashtagon
2009-11-24, 01:34 AM
Some summoning spells include a clause to the effect of "even if you lose control over the creature or control is taken from you, the summoned creature will not attack you or your allies".

For example, armageddon (BoED):


...After their arrival, the celestials obey the caster explicitly and never attack her, even if someone else manages to gain control over them. The caster does not need to concentrate to maintain control over the celestials. She can dismiss them singly or in groups at any time.

How would that interact with this spell? I'm sure there are other spells with similar clauses.

Temotei
2009-11-24, 01:37 AM
Also, what happened to the 4th level domain slot for the magic domain?

Lysander
2009-11-24, 01:55 AM
Some summoning spells include a clause to the effect of "even if you lose control over the creature or control is taken from you, the summoned creature will not attack you or your allies".

For example, armageddon (BoED):



How would that interact with this spell? I'm sure there are other spells with similar clauses.

In the cases of spells like that your control would be limited by the rules of the spell.


Also, what happened to the 4th level domain slot for the magic domain?

This could be an alternate spell to have the option of taking instead of Imbue with Spell Ability.

Temotei
2009-11-24, 03:23 AM
Spells have caster levels?

Lysander
2009-11-24, 03:30 AM
Spells have caster levels?

Yes, the level of the magician who cast the spell. This applies when dispelling magic too, it's harder to get rid of spells cast by higher level magicians.

Temotei
2009-11-24, 03:44 AM
But spells don't have caster levels. :smalltongue:

DracoDei
2009-11-24, 09:13 AM
I did it first:

Had this in my head for a VERY long time. Going ahead and typing it up.

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 indentify 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?


EDIT: 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 future changes:
[20:05] ElbarSemiAway: So there is a gap from 11 to 13 for wizards, and 11 to 14 for sorcerers...
[20:06] ElbarSemiAway: I should maybe put something that goes up to +15 in there to cover that gap between when you max out the first version and when you can take the "Greater"((Done, in fact, ended up adding THREE new versions))
[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

That thread was 6 months ago, and got NO responses on this forum (grumble).

Lysander
2009-11-24, 10:43 AM
I did it first:


That thread was 6 months ago, and got NO responses on this forum (grumble).

I guess there's nothing new under the sun. Good idea about the penalty for taking over spells of opposing alignment.

Temotei
2009-11-24, 07:25 PM
I'm sorry DracoDei. I would have surely checked up on it if I was actually active six months ago. :smallsmile: