Results 1 to 30 of 44
-
2011-08-20, 09:59 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2004
- Location
- In eternity.
- Gender
[3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Some spells are poorly worded or seemingly made without balance in mind. I'm including 3.5 and Pathfinder versions here; make it clear which version you reference. Also, tell the source (if not core) and why.
(I already started a list in the background, but this will help me expand it.)
-
2011-08-20, 10:15 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
You could just check the God Wizard handbook. That's got a solid list of spells that could use reworking.
Actually, any of the spells recommended in those handbooks (Cleric, Druid, etc). You know where to look.
-
2011-08-20, 10:17 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
- Gender
-
2011-08-20, 10:18 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2011
- Location
- Minnesota
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Polymoprh. You make the fighter redundant by transforming into a dragon without a breath weapon, and you're faster than him too, and you can fly.
Avatar of George the Dragon Slayer, from the upcoming Indivisible!
My Steam profile
Warriors and Wuxia, Callos_DeTerran's ToB setting
-
2011-08-20, 10:30 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2009
- Location
- The clouds
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Gate and Shapechange are great candidates as well, being of course on of the wizard's (and a few other classes) many "I win" buttons.
"When the DM is smiling, it's already too late"
Paranoia is fun, other games are not; play paranoia (and also 3.5, I play that alot too)
SpoilerOriginally Posted by NNescio
"Of course all magic manipulates energy, First Law of Thermodynamics, duh!"
See, the thing is, energy in D&D does not mean the same thing as it does in Physics.
-
2011-08-20, 10:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
I'd say all save or dies/lose. It's a very broken binary mechanic...you either make a save or are taken out, and can easily be targeted at low saves. If an enemy did 200 points of damage in one attack at 10th level, we'd say that was broken, but a save or die IS the equivalent and some people act like this is reasonable. It isn't. It is also part (not all) of the reason why casters are overpowered. Oh, and I don't think the ones (a subset) where PF decided to do 10 damage/level is balanced either (that's still enough to typically kill anyone in one shot).
Somewhat similarly, I'm leery of any spell that uses grapple mechanics, just because grapple mechanics are poorly balanced themselves.
Scry, Contact Other Plane, and other spells that gather information at a long distance need to be fixed. I think Scry should either require part of the person being scryed or a prepared item (that isn't magical) being placed on the person -- perhaps some means of scrying over a prepared area or area you've lived in a long time (so a NPC druid can scry over anywhere in HIS forest at least as long as he is there). Contact Other Plane and similar spells just need to have the idea they necessarily provide definitive answers completely removed (e.g. remove the table).
Other divinations need some work. I think True Seeing, for instance, really needs tweaking. It's pretty overpowered in how it makes Illusions completely useless. At the very least it needs Caster power check against other illusions (and perhaps grant a bonus to saves against some things).
Hmm, Explosive Runes needs a limit to how many you can make and/or not allowing the explosions to stack (e.g. 10 in the same area do the same amount of damage as 1 if they go off together).
I agree with how Alter Self, Polymorph, etc need adjusting. At the very least they should have limits on the physical changes they can do in terms of stat adjustments. Perhaps harsher than that.
Ability Score killers like Shivering Touch need to probably just get removed and just replaced with penalties to specific activities (like a -3 penalty on all dex-based rolls or something).
Anything that uses Experience could probably be gone over carefully. A ton of spells try to balance themselves with XP costs...and it really isn't a great way to do it (nor is gold honestly, but few spells actually try to be balanced around gold costs).
Some spells like Fabricate (e.g. skill replacers) should be fixed. Probably better to have them work as buffs...so you cast Fabricate to make a group of people better at crafting. That way you still need others, a wizard just makes it more efficient.
Edit: Oh, and buffs need some limits. Might be as simple as just specifying a max number of buffs that can be placed on someone at once.
There's really a lot of things.
Just remember you shouldn't be trying to bring a wizard's contribution down to a Fighter's level. That's insane. Aim for a Bard, Crusader, Warblade, Swordsage, Dread Necromancer, Factotum, or any number of other Tier 3 classes. Ones below that should be buffed, imho.Last edited by Drachasor; 2011-08-20 at 10:49 PM.
-
2011-08-20, 10:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
- Location
- The Final Chapter
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
We've got gate covered already, taking out some of the abuse potential, while still allowing it to do its job. Mordenkainen's disjunction, too.
-
2011-08-20, 10:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Streamers (depending on reading, it either insta-gibs you if you do anything, or does basically nothing).
-
2011-08-20, 11:13 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Perth, West Australia
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Antilife Shell.
Seriously, how the hell does this spell work?
Does Freedom of Movement negate it?
Can you Teleport through it?
What does "may be used defensively, not aggressively" mean? If you fall out of the sky onto a target, does it collapse, since it wasn't (arguably) an intentionally aggressive use of the Shell?
What in Gygax's name does "hedges out" mean?
Does your chewing gum lose its flavour on the bedpost overnight?
Or is it all too horrible to contemplate?Last edited by Saintheart; 2011-08-20 at 11:15 PM.
-
2011-08-20, 11:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
It's pretty clear what it means, but it's overpowered as hell. Living things cannot move INTO the area it wards. If the caster moves towards them (aggressive), then they can get in, but if the caster moves away again so they are outside, then they are stuck outside. ("hedges out" means "keeps out" btw). A falling creature, it seems would either land on the top of the shell or slide to the ground on the side of it, depending on the DM.
This means a druid can cast this, be wild shaped, then be the only thing capable of charging. Enemies can't charge him (shell is too small if he forces them in), but he can freely charge them). He also totally controls who can enter melee combat with him. Doesn't help against ranged attacks, granted, but totally controlling melee attacks like that is OP, imho.
With freedom of movement it is unclear how it works. Technically a Wall of Force "impedes movement" so can FoM allow you to move through one without effort?
-
2011-08-20, 11:34 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2009
- Location
- Perth, West Australia
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Well, this is the thing: Antilife Shell only says it stops creatures entering the field. Say a creature has a polearm and you're Wild Shaped to Large inside the field; I would have thought you could get hit, since the Shell is not blocking a living thing -- only the polearm is hitting you. Also, the Shell collapses if you use it aggressively, which I had thought meant the spell outright ends.
Or let's say you, as the caster, are trying to move through a five foot gap with two of your friends on either side of that gap. That's not an aggressive use of the field, but can the spell read the caster's intention? Does the spell mindread the caster to divine what's intended aggressive action? What if you take a particular spot so a creature can't retreat and thus get smacked by one of your friends -- there's no "aggressive" use by you of the shell, so would that work?
-
2011-08-20, 11:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Hmm, I missed that somehow. As for reach weapons, widening the shell would do the trick. I probably missed that because like you said later, you'll inevitable collapse the field. Move an inch to the right and you let insects in, collapsing it. Maybe that's why I didn't use it on my druid (it was many years ago, and I wasn't trying to get more power since I was already doing as well as the rest of the party combined).
-
2011-08-21, 12:08 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
I think that's beyond the scope of re-writting the most broken spells. That would require an entire change to game mechanics, especially since that would heavily lower the value of save boosting items and abilities. While they may be too powerful or prolific, we should perhaps concentrate on specific spells rather than a large category.
The PF changes actually do allow tougher character to survive a good chunk of the time in my experiences. Anyone with d10+ hit dice and a decent con investement (18+), can usually survive these. Not saying PF fixed the issue, but the changes are noticeable.
Somewhat similarly, I'm leery of any spell that uses grapple mechanics, just because grapple mechanics are poorly balanced themselves.
Scry, Contact Other Plane, and other spells that gather information at a long distance need to be fixed. I think Scry should either require part of the person being scryed or a prepared item (that isn't magical) being placed on the person -- perhaps some means of scrying over a prepared area or area you've lived in a long time (so a NPC druid can scry over anywhere in HIS forest at least as long as he is there). Contact Other Plane and similar spells just need to have the idea they necessarily provide definitive answers completely removed (e.g. remove the table).
Other divinations need some work. I think True Seeing, for instance, really needs tweaking. It's pretty overpowered in how it makes Illusions completely useless. At the very least it needs Caster power check against other illusions (and perhaps grant a bonus to saves against some things).
Hmm, Explosive Runes needs a limit to how many you can make and/or not allowing the explosions to stack (e.g. 10 in the same area do the same amount of damage as 1 if they go off together).
I agree with how Alter Self, Polymorph, etc need adjusting. At the very least they should have limits on the physical changes they can do in terms of stat adjustments. Perhaps harsher than that.
Anything that uses Experience could probably be gone over carefully. A ton of spells try to balance themselves with XP costs...and it really isn't a great way to do it (nor is gold honestly, but few spells actually try to be balanced around gold costs).
Some spells like Fabricate (e.g. skill replacers) should be fixed. Probably better to have them work as buffs...so you cast Fabricate to make a group of people better at crafting. That way you still need others, a wizard just makes it more efficient.
Edit: Oh, and buffs need some limits. Might be as simple as just specifying a max number of buffs that can be placed on someone at once.
Other core problem spells:
Teleport/Plane Shift: I think these should have a 1 minute casting time. This maintains their utility out of combat, but doesn't allow you to escape any unfavorable situation that you'd like. Dimension Door should maybe require your destination to be in Line of Sight?
Gate: I don't think I need to explain this one. Somewhat nerfed in PF - not sure if by enough though (I'm a bit shaky on it having a material component, now)
Time Stop: Not sure what to do with this. I introduced a spell that functions like dimensional anchor, but also counters time-altering effects, but that's not a very elegent fix, to quote myself.
Also, not a problem with spells themselves, but metamagic rods should also be looked at. Specifically, I don't think they should allow you to cast a spell with an effective sell level over 9.Last edited by Blisstake; 2011-08-21 at 12:09 AM.
Avatar by A Rainy Knight
Spoiler: CharactersTarok and Kamo, level 6 half-orc ranger, bunyip-slayer, and all around badass.
I like half-orcs
Retired:
Aldrin Cress, level 10 human sorcerer. Hero of Korvosa.
Tireas Slate, level 4 tiefling ninja. Eternally scheming.
DMing: Dragon's Demand
-
2011-08-21, 12:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Most divinaton spells need to be reworded so that people know exactly the kinds of questions you can and can't expect answers to. As they are, they do nothing but create 50-page debates on forums, or make them useless at the game table.
Planar Binding and Planar Ally could use some tweaking as well.Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2011-08-21, 02:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2010
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
The problem I can immediately see is that you'd need to cast it before the Timestop. Unless it had a really long duration and was either a personal buff (if anyone else casts Timestop, you get 'brought along') or affects a large area ('no time-wimey stuff allowed here').
But either way, it still has another problem - you're relying on a Magic Bullet (which may or may not be available) to counter the game-breaker.Imagine if all real-world conversations were like internet D&D conversations...
Protip: DnD is an incredibly social game played by some of the most socially inept people on the planet - Lev
I read this somewhere and I stick to it: "I would rather play a bad system with my friends than a great system with nobody". - Trevlac
-
2011-08-21, 05:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2010
- Location
- Pennsylvania
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Alter self --- makes me laugh
Polymorph -- facepalm
gate --- solar chain gate
Celerity --- add in the next two
Contingency
Time stop
there's alot --- i'd wager that in any book that has new spells --- there is probably more than one that is just broken/ can be abused in some horrid way.
Edit :: and as a DM I personally hate any/all divination spells and the mass confusion/lies/trickery that they bring
Also I'd like to point out that I posted and unless chrome or cookies are screwing with me --- this post hasn't bumped and i'm not listed as the last poster.Last edited by LaughingRogue; 2011-08-21 at 05:06 AM.
-
2011-08-21, 08:19 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Rockburst is in need of some editing.
Check out my Arboreal Halflings and my Megaliths of Zidydrion.
-
2011-08-21, 08:32 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Location
- Italy
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
All of these, plus the travelling ones who accidentally make you able to save the whole party everytime you have a standard action (Dimension Door could have Short range, Teleport, Greater Teleport, Plane Shift could have a longer casting time, Word of Recall could be Personal, and so on), plus the ones who break action economy (Celerity is the worst one), plus Gate.
Also, some Enchantment spells need to be fixed. The texts of Charm Person and Suggestion can't say that the target will not commit suicide for you and then include "jump in this pool of green boiling water" or "fight that dragon for me" as reasonable examples.
-
2011-08-21, 08:44 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Pathfinder spell: Terrible Remorse
The enemy loses their turn even if they make their save.
...
Get a wand and win every boss encounter if you win initiative or don't get squashed before you can cast
-
2011-08-21, 08:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
[This content was created for the Pathfinder rules by Paizo Publishing LLC and is part of the Pathfinder RPG product line.]
FAQ/Errata
If I make my saving throw against terrible remorse, do I become paralyzed for the duration of the spell?
No. The spell is a bit unclear here. When you are targeted by terrible remorse you do not make a saving throw until your turn. On your turn, you must make a Will saving throw. If you make the saving throw, you are frozen with sorrow and can take no actions, but this causes the spell to end. If you fail the saving throw, you deal damage to yourself, but can otherwise act normally.
[Source]
Official Update: In the description of the terrible remorse spell, change the final sentence to read as follows:
"If the creature saves, it is instead frozen with sorrow for 1 round, during which time it can take no actions and takes a -2 penalty to Armor Class, after which the spell ends."
Editor's Note: The updated wording has been applied to the spell text below.
It's not that bad.Lastgrasp
Running: Pathfinder RPG: Carrion Crown Adventure Path. http://exoknight.livejournal.com/
Planning: Hunter: The Vigil: Ordo Venator
http://lastgrasp.livejournal.com/
-
2011-08-21, 08:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Location
- Italy
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
It is. If you make the save, you lose 1 turn! If you have to fight a single BBEG this is awful.
Last edited by Pigkappa; 2011-08-21 at 08:59 AM.
-
2011-08-21, 09:25 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2005
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Yeah this. It would require changing how debuffs work though. We don't want to just say "Hold Person is banned because it's overpowered." We need a setting for Hold Person between you-lose and nothing. Probably a scheme like fear or sickening/nausea, but for everything. So almost every SoL turns into this mad lib:
Cause [Condition]
If the target fails its [Fort/Ref/Will] save, it becomes [Sickened equivalent]. If the target's current hit points are less than [n] x your caster level, it becomes [Nauseated equivalent] instead. Two [Sickened equivalent] effects become one [Nauseated equivalent] effect as normal.
Also, put names to this. Let's call the special stacking scheme Escalation, the least severe debuff is called the Base Condition, and any debuff worse (nauseated, frightened, panicked, etc) is called Escalated. Now we can write crap like this:
Lolbossmonster Immunity (Ex): Plutonium dragons are immune to escalated conditions. They always suffer the base condition instead. Two base conditions of the same type overlap instead of escalating.
Thoughts?
-
2011-08-21, 10:09 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Re: Save or Dies, I've implemented a houserule a few sessions back and it seems to be working fairly well so far.
a) Death occurs when at or below -10 hp. From the moment you go below -10, you have one round before you are dead - meaning your pals get one round to get you back up. If you fall in the low negatives and just bleed to death, that works out to one extra round. If you get omgwtfcritted, well your buddies get an extra chance to save you if they can push enough healing in one round. Note: this balances out with my near-complete removal of all means of resurrection.
b) Save-or-dies bring to to -10 hp instead. If they carry a secondary effect (such as Detonate's 20d6 explosion to adjacent targets) it happens after you actually die, one round later (unless saved).
If you don't want to go that far, a houserule that says save-or-dies brings you to -1 or -5 or -9 hp could work as well.
I don't mind other save-or-sucks too much as by and large they can be recovered from.
-
2011-08-21, 11:15 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Terrible remorse is a dumb spell, but it is affected by spell resistance, it's compulsion spell (a few ways to resist those), and it can only affect a single enemy at a time. If a player's abusing it, there are defnitely ways to go around it.
However, I think we're just looking at core spells here.
(Also, I'm not really a fan of how I deal with Time Stop, so I was wondering if anyone else had some good ideas - not that anyone should do what I did!)Avatar by A Rainy Knight
Spoiler: CharactersTarok and Kamo, level 6 half-orc ranger, bunyip-slayer, and all around badass.
I like half-orcs
Retired:
Aldrin Cress, level 10 human sorcerer. Hero of Korvosa.
Tireas Slate, level 4 tiefling ninja. Eternally scheming.
DMing: Dragon's Demand
-
2011-08-21, 11:18 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2007
- Location
- NY, USA
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
PF's Solid Fog.
The day I find a game is the day that HL2 Episode 3 is released!
My Brandenburg Interactive AAR game for EUIV.
Here is the recruitment page
-
2011-08-21, 01:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2011
-
2011-08-21, 02:39 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
I have considered a Condition Track like SW SAGA has. That can account for straight minuses to attack/defense. Status Effects could interact with that, getting worse as you go down that track. If you aren't down at all, a condition does nothing. If you go down it a "paralyze" effect might first become a slow, than not allow movement from your square, then at the bottom you are fully paralyzed (you are out then by that point anyhow). Note that a lot of conditions could be summarized into relatively few effects (getting turned to stone is a type of paralysis).
So you might go:
0: Status has no effect on that character
-1 and -2: Mild effect
-5 and -10: Significant Effect
Taken Out: Taken Out Effect (e.g. turned to stone, dead, whatever).
Save or Die effects then become Condition Track attacks, some or all of which attach a status.
Edit: Balancing these effects might require expanding the track a bit so there are more "rungs" compared to SW: SAGALast edited by Drachasor; 2011-08-21 at 03:52 PM.
-
2011-08-21, 02:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Astral Projection is... wonky. It's probably just supposed to be a convenient way of planar travel, but as it works, it not only makes you quasi-untouchable, it also doubles all your gear.
Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2011-08-21, 02:44 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- Switzerland
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
Astral Projection is... wonky. It's probably just supposed to be a convenient way of planar travel, but as it works, it not only makes you quasi-untouchable, it also doubles all your gear.
Resident Vancian Apologist
-
2011-08-21, 03:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2009
- Location
- Elsewhen
- Gender
Re: [3.P] Which spells are in biggest need of a rewrite?
I think the spell Resurgence from the Spell Compendium could use a rewrite to make things clearer. The spell says, "The subject of a resurgence spell can
make a second attempt to save against an ongoing spell, spell-like ability, or supernatural ability, such as dominate person." However, based on reading the spell I'm not sure if the creator's intended for it to apply to spells with Permanent or Instantaneous durations. Also, the spell doesn't have any kind of limit of the number of times it can be turned into the equivalent of several much higher level spells.
I like the idea behind the spell, but I think it can become a bit too useful for its level (1st level spell). Putting Resurgence on a 1st level wand and using it to duplicate Remove Curse, Remove Disease, or Break Enchantment spell is just inappropriate.