PDA

View Full Version : [3.5] Do you Ban Certian Spells?



Zertryx
2010-10-27, 07:44 PM
In my current campaign I have a Druid, Cleric, Warlock and a Rouge. The Cleric plans to become a Stormlord and the Druid wants to be a shape shifter turning into bears.

I wanted to know are there any Spells that I should not allow my players to have? and what spells do you forbid in your games?

Books we use are ...
- Core (phb, dmg, mm)
- Completes
- Race's Of
- Magic Of Incarnum
- Dragon Magic
- MIC
- Unearthed Arcanna
- Spell Compendium

Keld Denar
2010-10-27, 07:52 PM
Recent thread is relevant. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=172922)

dsmiles
2010-10-27, 07:52 PM
Personally, none. But I trust my group not to break the game.

Drakevarg
2010-10-27, 08:01 PM
I can't say what you should ban (except maybe disjunction), but I ban a lot of spells, though largely for flavor reasons. I could list 'em all, but they'd take up half the page.

Godless_Paladin
2010-10-27, 08:01 PM
I ban a few (like Streamers, Venomfire, and Celerity), and tweak some others.

imperialspectre
2010-10-27, 08:48 PM
I ban Streamers, and ban Venomfire as part of a general ban on the entire book Serpent Kingdoms.

Other than that, my games tend to be more or less anything-goes. Other than Doc Roc, none of my friends that live near me are going to come up with anything I don't know about, so it's fine by me if they want to break things. Generally speaking, the rule is that I'll optimize just a tiny bit less than my players do.

Skorj
2010-10-27, 09:05 PM
Definitely streamers, and disjunction (never ever open that can of worms), and you should really understand celerity well (and its tactical implication and limitations) or ban it. Never heard of venomfire.

EDIT: oh, and see the thread on Ray of Stupidity- it's not game breaking in general, but you'd want to ban in some campaigns (if animals or other very low INT critters play a big part).

imperialspectre
2010-10-27, 10:15 PM
I don't ban Disjunction because it serves legitimate tactical purposes, such as taking away all of the other guy's shiny stuff. If people really don't want to deal with it, they should just carry rings of counterspelling or one of the many other ways to not get hit by spells you really don't want to deal with.

Hell, if it's that big of a problem, just go with the pointy wizard hat.

gbprime
2010-10-27, 10:24 PM
I'm better at powergaming than my players, so no, there's nothing I'm worried about. :smallbiggrin: But I vowed only to use my powers for good.

We don't use psionics or incarnum though, so that does remove some possibilities right there.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-10-28, 12:07 AM
I'm the resident optimizer in my group. I've told my players that they can use anything they want, but anything cheesy then becomes available to NPCs, and there are more of them than there are PCs. I haven't had them break anything so far.

Eldariel
2010-10-28, 12:09 AM
Not if I can houserule things into sanity and not if it removes something too important from the world; screw PAO being broken, Wizards are supposed to be able to permanently transform X into Y. In such cases I much prefer solution of trying to find a non-broken version of the spell rather than removing it entirely. Something like Streamers tho? Nobody even knows how it works; yeah, good riddance.

Jolly
2010-10-28, 12:34 AM
Heck, last campaign I banned arcane magic entirely just because I was very strapped for time and didn't feel like adjudicating.

tyckspoon
2010-10-28, 12:47 AM
Never heard of venomfire.


Venomfire adds d6/cl acid damage to any poison-bearing natural attacks you have. It's notorious for several things- the damage is uncapped, so caster level boosts work very well with it (and being primarily a Druid spell, well, Divine caster levels are markedly easier to raise than arcane.) It's hour/level, so it's pretty much a permanent buff (and again, it makes it very easy to apply short-term caster-level increases to it.) And it does utterly ridiculous things when applied to the Fleshraker and its three poisonous pouncing attacks (it has five on a pounce, but only 3 are poisonous.) Fleshraker is already a singularly effective Wildshape and Animal Companion choice for the level, and Venomfire just throws it completely over the top.

PlzBreakMyCmpAn
2010-10-28, 01:08 AM
Ofc, check BG for the Dirty Handbook fixes.

imperialspectre
2010-10-28, 01:32 AM
Most of the really serious balance problems in 3.5 come from tier differences. The existence of "broken" spells, provided that a) there's agreement how they work and b) there isn't a huge gap in how available they are to different characters, doesn't really break anything. In a world where classes and monsters that don't keep up to Tier 3 or better simply get weeded out by natural selection, and the wizards have figured out that things like PAO are more effective when you start with a set of class features that actually makes use of [Ex] abilities and special attacks, balance isn't that big of a deal.

The bottom line is that there are very few spells, in and of themselves, that make (we'll say) a well-built warblade completely irrelevant UNLESS you're dealing with chains, loops, or other such tricks. Those tricks can generally be neutralized by mutually assured destruction and the assumption that swords ensure the evolution of shields. The problem is when you have such a huge set of options that a warblade can't expect to counter all of your combinations (as with a wizard), or when the non-caster just doesn't have meaningful or useful options (as with a fighter or monk).

So if you're really concerned about spellcasters breaking your game, ban prepared full-casters, because they can literally switch to a new bag of tricks overnight. Ban non-casters who don't have access to some other form of scaling power, because they just don't do anything after the first few levels. But most spells aren't going to break your game in and of themselves, unless your world is unrealistically fragile.

Cipher Stars
2010-10-28, 03:38 AM
quite the opposite, I even make more spells. :smallcool: again, I just a Karma/Balance system. if things are getting heated with flying meteors then their going to be eating flying comets. :smallamused:

LordBlades
2010-10-28, 03:58 AM
In my gaming group there is pretty much a common consensus regarding what goes and what doesn't.

So far we have a very short list of spells/other stuff that gets banned in every game: PaO for obvious reasons, Celerity, Wraithstrike (because it makes armor irrelevant, and anyone that can't cast Scintillating Ccales is more or less dead before the encoutner even starts). Gate might also make it on this list if we get to 17th level+ more often (only happened once so far).

In addition, each particular DM has banned one thing or another that he didn't like. For example, in the current campaign, my DM has banned Assay SR, Resurgence and Revivify/Last Breath. He explained that he really liked SR to play a role in some encoutner and also wanted death or failed saves, when they happened to bear at least some significance.

Cogidubnus
2010-10-28, 04:05 AM
I'm the resident optimizer in my group. I've told my players that they can use anything they want, but anything cheesy then becomes available to NPCs, and there are more of them than there are PCs. I haven't had them break anything so far.

He does scary, scary things with casters. Ever tried fighting a room of illusions without True Seeing? Yeah, somebody died.

Zen Master
2010-10-28, 05:18 AM
We never get high enough in level to have to worry about truly horrible stuff like gate or timestop. So all I have to do is to modify fly and teleport to be impractical to use, and all is well.

There is the druid who's fond of the famous rhino (or triceratops) avalanche. But when all is said and done? It takes long enough to get all the spells cast - it's never actually happened.

Greymane
2010-10-28, 05:51 AM
We don't ban spells, typically. There is a Gentleman's Agreement of "If the players have it, so do the NPCs" that I see a lot of people tend to adopt as well.

We like some of the broken spells, but not to be cheesy in combat with them, really.

For example: We had a half sun elf/drow in one of our previous campaigns, and considering the stigma of her heritage, she took advantage of our friendship we made with some Sylthalar (sp? The swarm-things from Lords of Madness). She was Phrenic, and high enough level for Teleport, so every few days she'd go back and request another PaO into something. Usually something pretty, like a full sun elf. It was so amusing, that we just started saying she was a cosmetic surgery addict.

Serpentine
2010-10-28, 05:55 AM
I've never really banned anything much, but my players are asked not to use Wind Walk just cuz a lot of my adventures are based on travel. If anyone really, really wanted it, I'd make do, but they don't, so we're good.

Emmerask
2010-10-28, 06:30 AM
In my current campaign I have a Druid, Cleric, Warlock and a Rouge. The Cleric plans to become a Stormlord and the Druid wants to be a shape shifter turning into bears.

I wanted to know are there any Spells that I should not allow my players to have? and what spells do you forbid in your games?

Books we use are ...
- Core (phb, dmg, mm)
- Completes
- Race's Of
- Magic Of Incarnum
- Dragon Magic
- MIC
- Unearthed Arcanna
- Spell Compendium


-Polymorph and all of its like (baleful polymorph, alter self etc)
-rope trick
-Streamers
-Celerity

-contact other plane and its like nerft to no future available
-detect evil nerft to 1/3 of the population is evil

LordBlades
2010-10-28, 06:59 AM
We don't ban spells, typically. There is a Gentleman's Agreement of "If the players have it, so do the NPCs" that I see a lot of people tend to adopt as well.



That's how our group works too. If we use certain good tactics, we can fully expect to see them used against us when it's appropriate for the enemies to do so.

mostlyharmful
2010-10-28, 07:16 AM
I'd throw Control Winds in there as well, just for the enourmous affect it can have without your players even meaning to.

plus,
1.) Called/Summoned minions can't be forced to use SLAs that would burn xp if they were spells, Created ones just don't have them
2.) The future is uncertain when your actions affect it, you can look at big stuff but the more the PCs are involved the harder it is to get details from divinations
3.) Simulacrums don't have Su or SLAs
4.) Teleport/plane shift line has a ten minute casting time
5.) Polymorph school line replaces the core versions
6.) permanancy spells can be surpressed but not dispelled except by Disjunctions
7.) You may use Disjunction but each PC usage means the player owes the group a pizza
8.) Fabricate is ruled on a case by case common sense basis, you can't make a thousand swords all joined together with a thin string of metal just CAUSE alright?
9.) Feeblemind wears off after 1/day per CL

Master_Rahl22
2010-10-28, 07:35 AM
I was expecting a category of spells called Certian Spells, much like Druid Spells or Sorc/Wiz Spells. :smalltongue:

The best way to approach a banlist is to wait until something becomes a problem. If nobody has used Shivering Touch in a broken way yet then don't worry about it. When somebody starts abusing Celerity, say "Cute, and I'll refund your money/let you learn a different spell/whatever, but that spell no longer exists in this game."

Sir Swindle89
2010-10-28, 07:53 AM
It very much depends on the setting. In my Anthropomorphic Gestalt game i openly admit every thing is broken to my characters and don't ban any thing (except long range teleports and plane shifts because of story reasons)

More reasonable games i ban things on a case by case basis.

Newt
2010-10-28, 08:05 AM
What's PaO?

I just read these threads to see what I can abuse. :P

Although there's a relatively easy way of controlling players who are overly evil, mess with reality, etc. Just include the sanity system from Heroes of Horror. Assign a value for every evil/reality bending act and then start penalizing. I've never played a DnD game, or DM'd. but that should work really well. Wizards who cause time to stop on their command, who change the weather, they'd either let the power go to their head or start withdrawing from the world, becoming Chaotic. Seeing nothing as stable, as permanent.

People who use Venomfire would eventually go insane or completely evil. Only so much pain and suffering you can inflict before it gets to you. I'm a Lovecraft fan so I may be biased towards the sanity system, but in theory, it should work really well. And you wouldn't have to bother OP'ing the NPC's to stay on par with the PC's. Just find a LG god who smites them when they get too evil, or a CN being who whisks them away to Pandemonium when they get too C. Or just let them go mad.

The rest of the OP builds (anything not caster) seem to be so situational that merely not providing that situation would result in them being useless. A jumper is useless in a cavern with a low ceiling, a reach weapon is useless when the NPC's attack from range, a charger build is useless when there's no room to charge. And so on. No point removing elements when you control the world. Besides, everyone knows Planar Druid beats any spell found in the books so far in terms of OP cheese.


TL;DR/DC;DR

Imposing a sanity system for magic/evil acts would very quickly result in a self correcting problem. Too many remove insanity spells would eventually fracture a persons brain beyond repair.

Situational builds are useless outside their comfort zone.

I still don't know what PaO is.

Quietus
2010-10-28, 08:18 AM
In my current campaign I have a Druid, Cleric, Warlock and a Rouge.

ROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUE ROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUE Unless you mean that one of your other characters has a serious makeup problem, for the love of god, why must people fail at spelling one of the core classes so very often?

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-28, 08:30 AM
What's PaO?

Polymorph Any Object. The most broken uses are to cast it twice and gain a new form permanently. Other broken uses include using it to become a high INT creature for purposes of boosting intelligence, since some believe that PaO removes the HD cap already in place on Polymorph. The line of reasoning is that you may use it to cause something to become a rock, which has no HD at all. It's pretty shaky and cheesy.

Skjaldbakka
2010-10-28, 08:32 AM
The groups I play with have a gentleman's agreement: the player's get to use the cheese first, but if they use cheese, it becomes fair game for the bad guys.

Serpentine
2010-10-28, 08:34 AM
ROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUE ROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUE Unless you mean that one of your other characters has a serious makeup problem, for the love of god, why must people fail at spelling one of the core classes so very often?Try these (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120361) for (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7967533&postcount=26) size (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10445).

jiriku
2010-10-28, 08:38 AM
I generally ban spells for thematic reasons, rather than balance reasons. For example, in my last campaign, I didn't use the alignment system, so all spells that detected or concealed alignment were banned and all spells that targetted creatures for good or ill based on their alignment were either rewritten or banned. This was less of a "ban" and more of a "hey, these spells are now useless, don't waste your time with them".

If a given spell has an overpowered application, I tend to rewrite it rather than banning it (for example, I reclassified venomfire as a 9th level spell, and created two lesser versions of it at 3rd and 6th level).

However, the reason I'm comfortable doing this is that a) I optimize better than anyone in my group, b) I have a lot of time on my hands to devote to the hobby, and c) it's fun for me. If you lack the time, ability, or inclination to close all the loopholes, you may find it appropriate to use bans to enforce game balance.

gbprime
2010-10-28, 08:48 AM
Nobody in our group has discovered Venomfire yet (haven't had a druid in a few years), so that one's okay.

And I don't mind Rope Trick. If the party insists on using it as a foxhole, then I'll just make the dungeon areas harder. More low CR foes that take more resources to kill... they HAVE to use Rope Trick to recharge.

But I broke them of the habit last campaign around 9th level. They were using it as a foxhole to ambush. Eventually they ran across a bad guy with some observant minions who led him back to the area... and the PC's got awoken by a few Transdimensional Fireballs. Now they're more cautious with it.

dobu
2010-10-28, 09:11 AM
Only Spell banned in my campaign: Powerword: Pain. No save, just die in the first 3-5 levels. Not even celerity or polymorph is banned.

Polymorph is just way too much work/headache for my players to be used (rule of thumb in my campaign: when it slows down playing too much, don't use it!).

thompur
2010-10-28, 11:15 AM
What is "Streamers" and what does it do?

Dr.Epic
2010-10-28, 11:16 AM
I can't think of any.

senrath
2010-10-28, 11:17 AM
What is "Streamers" and what does it do?

It's a spell that deals damage to the target every time they take any action. I think.

Edit: Yeah, what he said VVVV

jiriku
2010-10-28, 11:17 AM
No one is actually quite sure, because the spell is badly written, but by the most potent interpretation, it hits you with a stick every time you take any action, including free actions. A more reasonable interpretation is that it hits you once, and is then discharged, but the wording is so vague that people have difficulty agreeing on what exactly it does.

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-28, 11:23 AM
What is "Streamers" and what does it do?
It's a 5th level lockdown spell from Shining South. Basically it's a "do nothing or take a bunch of damage" spell.

Aotrs Commander
2010-10-28, 11:28 AM
Yes - but only a very few1 - but errata others instead. A bit like PairO'Dice Lost, I run on what's good for the goose is good for the gander for all other instances, and I'm a fair to good optimiser (and one of the better of my groups).

I ban (or rather simply do not allow) far more equipment, races and PrCs, though. In my games, you will have a list (and to be fair, it's a big list) of what stuff is allowed, neatly indexed with what book it's in, so save everyone time and effort.



On the errata'd list are (technically) Holy Word2 et al, Disjunction, Ray of Stupidity, the Cure line3; all i can think of at the moment; the rest are usually self-balancing when the NPC hit the PCs right back with them.

On my I haven't banned 'em yet because no-one's used 'em and I thus haven't had problems yet list are things like Celerity and Metamagic Reducers.



1Shivering Touch, lookin' at you...

2Or Holy Crap as my groups generally refer to it...

3Though that's an up, not a down, errata, so they actually, y'know, meaningfully compare to the damage spells...

Godless_Paladin
2010-10-28, 12:40 PM
ROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUE ROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUEROGUE Unless you mean that one of your other characters has a serious makeup problem, for the love of god, why must people fail at spelling one of the core classes so very often?

Rouges are so overpowdered.

hamishspence
2010-10-28, 12:46 PM
No one is actually quite sure, because the spell is badly written, but by the most potent interpretation, it hits you with a stick every time you take any action, including free actions. A more reasonably interpretation is that it hits you once, and is then discharged, but the wording is so vague that people have difficulty agreeing on what exactly it does.

As written, there's nothing in the text of the spell to imply that each streamer expires once it's made its readied touch attack.

And you can destroy the streamers by hitting them with a magic weapon.

senrath
2010-10-28, 12:57 PM
As written, there's nothing in the text of the spell to imply that each streamer expires once it's made its readied touch attack.

And you can destroy the streamers by hitting them with a magic weapon.

Actually, there is a single phrase that could mean they do expire. Specifically the "when the target next takes an action" bit.

Skorj
2010-10-28, 01:55 PM
I don't ban Disjunction because it serves legitimate tactical purposes, such as taking away all of the other guy's shiny stuff. If people really don't want to deal with it, they should just carry rings of counterspelling or one of the many other ways to not get hit by spells you really don't want to deal with.

Hell, if it's that big of a problem, just go with the pointy wizard hat.

The problem with Disjunction is mechanical/OOC. How well do you know the item saving throw rules? How well do your players know them, or care? The first time your party gets spammed with disjunction, suddenly those rules matter - a lot! Your session can just end at that point, with hours spent with the players who "don't do rules well" struggling with the details, and really it's not information people normall care about ("A magic itemís saving throw bonus equals 2 + one-half its caster level (round down). " - what's that for a +5 sword again? Is it higher than my will save? If I have a +3 flaming burst sword, is that 1, 2 or 3 rolls?). And then the equipment list. :smalleek: Do you really have every low-value item recorded on everyone's character sheet in detail? (I'm a stickler for that, but it's not common). How long will it take, once you understand the item save rules, to identify every magic item carried by a high-level D&D party and figure out the roll for each one? :eek:

Plus, once you've opened the door, the players will start using it, and you'll have to worry about it for every NPC with magical equipment. Plus, if you care about WBL, it's a planning pain. If you're running a very low magic campaign, with disjunction as a way to keep it very low magic, that's one thing, otherwise it just wastes so much time on a spell that the game is no worse off without.

hamishspence
2010-10-28, 02:36 PM
Specifically the "when the target next takes an action" bit.

The phrase was "whenever the target next takes any sort of action"- which is not very good grammar.

If it had been "Whenever the target takes any sort of action" it would have been better worded- and supported the "it doesn't expire" view better.

If it had been "When the target next takes any sort of action" it would also have been better worded- and interpreting it as expiring once the readied action is taken might have made more sense.

But the "Whenever" and "next" together look a bit ugly.

senrath
2010-10-28, 02:41 PM
Like I said, it could be interpreted. Not that it was the only interpretation.

hamishspence
2010-10-28, 02:50 PM
Using "It doesn't say it does, therefore it doesn't" logic, might tend to support the "they expire" viewpoint.

Specifically "It doesn't say they ready a new action after they've readied their first one, therefore they don't" would be the argument.

On the minus side, for characters, your readied action expires without taking effect the moment you initiative count comes up again (and so, you have to ready a new action).

So, if a streamer is like a summoned monster- it would need an initiative- and if so, then for it to be able to keep an action readied for the duration of the spell, it would need to be able to ready a new action every time it's initiative count comes up again.

Problematic.

Callista
2010-10-28, 02:51 PM
Just Polymorph Any Object.

Skorj
2010-10-28, 03:08 PM
Just Polymorph Any Object.

You know, this reply would be on-topic for about half the threads in this forum. :smallbiggrin: Why is wizard better than X? How do I overcome high AC? Why does the tier system matter? Killing a Balor? Your funniest death? Your most excessive overkill?

Just Polymorph Any Object :smallbiggrin:

big teej
2010-10-28, 03:16 PM
-raises hand-

alright, I'll bite, meat shield speaking here.

what is this 'streamers' spell? and what does it do/say?

and why can no one come to a consensus on what it does?

EDIT: ninja'd while away from the computer...

as far as contributing, I ban anything thats in a book I don't have + psionics (which is slightly redundant, as I don't have the book yet)

but given that I have NEVER had anyone play a full caster... I have been blessed with not having to worry about 'what happens at x level when casters make everyone else useless?'

Karoht
2010-10-28, 03:22 PM
I have a friend who plays nothing but wizards and occasionally sorcerers. That said, his solution to every situation is either fireball, or his save-or-hurt/die of choice. Before those, it's magic missile and burning hands are the only two he will cast (other than mage armor).
So I'm playing a melee oriented campaign soon where arcane magic is rare-er than normal. If I let him play a spell caster (because he would be the only one allowed), I've already told him up front that I'm going to ban some whole schools of magic, albeit with some fluff reasons to go with it. It might cause him to think and cast different spells and use them creatively, or he'll perhaps finally play something else.

Related info:
In that same campaign, I'm also altering Leadership somewhat. Because if I leave Leadership the way it is, all 5 players will take it, all 5 will fuss over their army and cohort every single session rather than playing their character, and every combat looks less and less like a party of adventurers and more like a table-top war game.

hamishspence
2010-10-28, 03:25 PM
-raises hand-

alright, I'll bite, meat shield speaking here.

what is this 'streamers' spell? and what does it do/say?

and why can no one come to a consensus on what it does?

it creates streamers, which "target creatures" when the spell is cast, "move on their own without your concentration"- hover in the target's square, and have a readied melee touch attack (at your base attack bonus)

The trigger for the readied touch attack, is any action by the target.

Each streamer can be attacked (AC20) but only with magic weapons. Any successful attack on a streamer destroys the streamer.

When the spell ends, all streamers disappear.

The main source of debate, is what happens after an individual streamer has made its readied attack- does it disappear, or automatically ready a new one?

Another question is- can the same readied action, be hung onto round after round?

Normally, creatures have to ready a new action after their initiative count comes up again.
But streamers are parts of a spell- they don't each have a listed initiative count.

Lamech
2010-10-28, 03:29 PM
Specifically "It doesn't say they ready a new action after they've readied their first one, therefore they don't" would be the argument.Hmm... I would support the interpertation that they do not reready actions. If a spell does not say it does A it does not do A. They technically wouldn't expire, but it would still keep them from attacking again.


On the minus side, for characters, your readied action expires without taking effect the moment you initiative count comes up again (and so, you have to ready a new action).But do they have an initiative count? 'Cause their iniative count doesn't come up if they don't have one.
Also if it says the "next action" they only go once as well. They go anytime the target takes his "next action" and as many times as the target takes his "next action". But he can only do that once, so the spell is only going once.




Polymorph Any Object. The most broken uses are to cast it twice and gain a new form permanently. Other broken uses include using it to become a high INT creature for purposes of boosting intelligence, since some believe that PaO removes the HD cap already in place on Polymorph. The line of reasoning is that you may use it to cause something to become a rock, which has no HD at all. It's pretty shaky and cheesy. A couple things to note. One if a rock has no HD is neither less then or more than 15 HD, so your not changing into something with more than max HD. So basically no changing into a balor.

Two the spell checks duration of your current form against your original form after you have changed. Presumably this means unpolypmorphed. Or at least one can interpert it to mean unpolymorphed.

big teej
2010-10-28, 03:32 PM
it creates streamers, which "target creatures" when the spell is cast, "move on their own without your concentration"- hover in the target's square, and have a readied melee touch attack (at your base attack bonus)

The trigger for the readied touch attack, is any action by the target.

Each streamer can be attacked (AC20) but only with magic weapons. Any successful attack on a streamer destroys the streamer.

When the spell ends, all streamers disappear.

The main source of debate, is what happens after an individual streamer has made its readied attack- does it disappear, or automatically ready a new one?

Another question is- can the same readied action, be hung onto round after round?

Normally, creatures have to ready a new action after their initiative count comes up again.
But streamers are parts of a spell- they don't each have a listed initiative count.

gaming issues aside.... your explanation (which was very helpful) conjured a very humorous image in my mind....

spoilered for a long ramble

that of a fighter, in full plate, wielding a great sword, staring at a brightly colored ribbon floating in the air above him... after a few moments, the fighter simply shrugs and raises his sword to charge a bad guy

WHAP

the ribbon smacks him in the face... startling the fighter, who looks at the ribbon in shock and disgust... he then proceeds to try and attack the baddy again, only to be smacked by the ribbon again....

after a few more tries a this, the fighter merely stands stock still at attention, doing nothing...........

but then his noes itches....
so obviously, he goes to scratch it
WHAP!
smacked again
so now we have a fighter, in full plate, big burly guy, crying in frusteration, because a little pink ribbon is smiting him if he so much as sneezes....
stop that -whap-
stop that -whap-

.... I love it :smallbiggrin:

I think I'll be taking this spell if I ever take a caster:smallsmile:

senrath
2010-10-28, 03:43 PM
Two the spell checks duration of your current form against your original form after you have changed. Presumably this means unpolypmorphed. Or at least one can interpert it to mean unpolymorphed.

Let's just say that there was a thread on this very matter and I'm pretty sure no consensus on what it actually means when it says "original form" was ever reached.

ffone
2010-10-28, 05:17 PM
Rouges are so overpowdered.

I almost made a PC who was, for all purposes (but not named), the Moulin Rogue, with the same backstory as the girl from the movie (arranged marriage to duke, worked at a windmill-topped theater house, yadda yadda).

Then I remembered, every third female fantasy character has an unwanted arranged marriage in her backstory, and thought better of it.

Callista
2010-10-28, 09:07 PM
Odd. I don't think I've ever used an arranged marriage in my characters' backstories. I did once use the "village killed by orc raid" cliche, though, to my eternal chagrin.

Back on topic, what do you guys think about banning "Wish"? It's not that the spell's overpowered; it's that it seems to be a recipe for argument and semantic nitpicking...

ericgrau
2010-10-28, 09:34 PM
+1 to shivering touch and the other obscure abusable spells mentioned. I'll add wraithstrike for the gish/UMD auto-hit abuse. Really any spell that can be easily abused into something way stronger than its level, often in a way different from what the designers had in mind. The rest are open to interpretation IMO and depend on group power level.

For example I'd say the orb of X spells because they're no save, no SR (many high level encounters rely on SR and other no SR spells are much weaker than or different from SR:yes spells), conjuration, make no sense and all of the above applications which people exploit them for are not the original intent of the spell (damage with a minor additional effect, like 4e). But they're far from the most broken thing and many groups are fine with them.

Quietus
2010-10-28, 10:12 PM
I almost made a PC who was, for all purposes (but not named), the Moulin Rogue, with the same backstory as the girl from the movie (arranged marriage to duke, worked at a windmill-topped theater house, yadda yadda).

Then I remembered, every third female fantasy character has an unwanted arranged marriage in her backstory, and thought better of it.

I have a male character using that. Well, not so much unwanted; He loved (and maybe still does love) the woman. She wasn't too fond of him, though.. so he left instead of seeing her suffer.

Now he's a serial womanizer, and a god. :smallcool:

lightningcat
2010-10-28, 11:29 PM
Odd. I don't think I've ever used an arranged marriage in my characters' backstories. I did once use the "village killed by orc raid" cliche, though, to my eternal chagrin.

Back on topic, what do you guys think about banning "Wish"? It's not that the spell's overpowered; it's that it seems to be a recipe for argument and semantic nitpicking...

Wish has always been the bane of players in the groups I've played in or ran. The DM has always been given permission to take the wording however they want to, its a holdover from previous editions. So we only use wish in special situations.

Lamech
2010-10-29, 12:23 AM
Odd. I don't think I've ever used an arranged marriage in my characters' backstories. I did once use the "village killed by orc raid" cliche, though, to my eternal chagrin.

Back on topic, what do you guys think about banning "Wish"? It's not that the spell's overpowered; it's that it seems to be a recipe for argument and semantic nitpicking...

Luckily the 3rd edition wishes (assuming the player goes off the safe-list) allows the DM to interpert the wish to screw the wizard and only have the wish be partially fulfilled. So... no amount of laywering will prevent the DM from killing you painfully.

Boci
2010-10-29, 12:37 AM
Luckily the 3rd edition wishes (assuming the player goes off the safe-list) allows the DM to interpert the wish to screw the wizard and only have the wish be partially fulfilled. So... no amount of laywering will prevent the DM from killing you painfully.

Which could then very easily lead to an argument because the player will most likely believe they weren't abusing the spell, arguing that it did cost them a 9th level spell slot and 5,000XP and the DM defending his interpretation of the result.
The only way to avoid it is to stick to the listed benefits (in which case it won't screw up" but then it isn't really wish but more limited wish, greater.

FelixG
2010-10-29, 12:44 AM
No, i dont ban spells.

absolmorph
2010-10-29, 03:35 AM
I'm the DM, enjoy high power games and am the only optimizer in the group.
So, no. I don't need to. Heck, I buff their spells, since the sorcerers have agreed to focus on supporting the others (a quick explanation of damage possibilities was all it took).

Tytalus
2010-10-29, 07:02 AM
I also don't ban spells in general. My current group is rather low-OP, so broken spells have never been an issue. Simply powerful spells (glitterdust, grease, black tentacles) are fine.

If something broken comes up, it can be dealt with on the spot; the players generally don't mind. That seems preferable to a long ban-list.