Greater Invocation: Plundering Dispel

[Barbarian MD]

So, Devour Magic stinks as a Greater Invocation (greater dispel, but as a touch attack, and you gain temp hp), and Relentless Dispelling is so awesome as a Lesser Invocation (dispel in this round and the next), so I thought I would simply combine them, and then ask if it's balanced.

Yes, I know it's not very creative or insightful, but I think it'd be a practical change.

Devour magic stinks as a Greater Invocation. I thought I'd make something new.

Plundering Dispel
Greater, 6th

You may use the targeted version of Dispel Magic, Greater, as the spell. On a successful dispel, you may appropriate for yourself (or for any ally or allies within 30 feet) spell(s) with a total number of levels equal to 1/2 invoker level. (For example, an 18th level invoker may plunder a single 9th level spell, or a 5th and a 4th, etc.) You know how many rounds remain on all spells before you choose which one(s) to steal--the duration remains unchanged--but the spell(s) (once it becomes active on you) is treated as being at your caster level or your foe's, whichever is higher. When stealing multiple spells, these may be distributed among allies as you wish.

Make a single spellcraft check (15+highest spell level). If you fail this check, yet want to plunder spells, draw blindly from a list of spells until you wish to stop or reach the spell-level limit, whichever comes first.

In addition, if you choose, you may instead deal damage to your foe and heal yourself or allies within 30' a total of 5 HP per spell level you could have stolen. You may choose to steal a combination of spells and HP.

Finally, this invocation may be used to counterspell, as Greater Dispel. No spells are plundered when using this invocation in this manner.

Greater Relentless Dispelling
Greater; 6th

You may use targeted version of Dispel Magic, Greater, as the spell. In the round following, the target of this invocation is subjected to another targeted dispel at the start of your turn.

So my question is: is this balanced as a Greater Invocation?

[Barbarian MD]

Anyone? Not even a "yeah, that'll work" or a "no, that needs to be a Dark invocation?"

[Stycotl]

sorry, took a while to get to it.

looks fine, balance-wise. might want to add in some other element to it though; seems kind of lackluster for a greater.

since the lesser already gets an echoed effect, make this one echo the effect with a higher caster level, or a random caster level, or with an explosion of half-damage eldritch blast or something crazy.

it is a greater invocation, after all.

'course, i could be way off the balance mark too...

[Barbarian MD]

What about the ability to steal one (and only one) spell that you dispel? So if they've got Haste, Blur, Mirror Image, and Protection from Evil, and you dispelled all four, you could choose to take Haste for yourself, but the duration would continue from when your enemy cast it, rather than starting over as though it were a new instance of the spell. Would that bump it up to Greater, or would it drive it all the way to Dark?

[AugustNights]

The problem, I find, with balancing the warlocks abilities, is that they aren't almost ever. There isn't a good warlock metric.
That said, giving Devour magic the relentless bump isn't a bad idea.

If you do go with steal spell, I'd suggest leaving the option to gain temp Hp instead of stealing a spell.

[Stycotl]

What about the ability to steal one (and only one) spell that you dispel? So if they've got Haste, Blur, Mirror Image, and Protection from Evil, and you dispelled all four, you could choose to take Haste for yourself, but the duration would continue from when your enemy cast it, rather than starting over as though it were a new instance of the spell. Would that bump it up to Greater, or would it drive it all the way to Dark?

cool. i think that this could work as a greater invocation. it might need some sort of qualifier, like "if it is of a spell level equal to one-half of your character level or lower," or making it a randomly stolen effect, or something stupid like that. but i think as is, it should be fine a as a greater.

The problem, I find, with balancing the warlocks abilities, is that they aren't almost ever. There isn't a good warlock metric.
That said, giving Devour magic the relentless bump isn't a bad idea.

If you do go with steal spell, I'd suggest leaving the option to gain temp Hp instead of stealing a spell.

i think that this is a good idea. if the stolen spell isn't random, then give the warlock the opportunity to gain temp hit points if none of the dispelled effects would benefit him/her.

[Barbarian MD]

New wording: Plundering Dispel. You can steal a certain number of spells depending on spell level. The "relentless part" is dropped.

[Stycotl]

any one 7th-9th level spell OR any two 4th-6th level spells OR any four 1st-3rd level spells that you dispelled from your target.

what if all you want a 4th level and a few 1st level spells? how do you arbitrate stealing spells from multiple spell categories?

maybe you say that he can steal spell levels equal to 1/2 his invoker level, whatever level spells those might be.

also, i still think that giving temp hit points would be appropriate for the times when none of the dispelled effects would be helpful to you or your party. if you do go with a 1 spell level/2 invoker levels plunder ability, then you could say that every spell level you do not plunder becomes 5 temp hit points or something. or maybe even make so that the temp hit points are split between allies within 30 feet.

[Barbarian MD]

How 'bout this: Steal spell levels, divided however you see fit, equal to CL?

[Stycotl]

How 'bout this: Steal spell levels, divided however you see fit, equal to CL?

i personally think that 1/2 invoker level is more balanced, but i am not adamant on the stance.

full invoker level means that at 20th level you could be swiping two 9th level spells for yourself if available, which is more than i think a 5th-6th level invocation should be capable of.

[Barbarian MD]

You make a good point. When I next log on (not on my phone), I'll make it 1/2 CL and add an HP gain. That should finish the 'brew

[tigerusthegreat]

Reading this reminded me of Reaving Dispel from Spell Compendium (Sor/Wiz 9).

Basics (for those that don't want to look it up) are its is a greater dispel effect that when used as a counterspell or targetted dispel allows the caster to steal the effects that they dispel.

In comparison to that I'd say your invocation is fairly balanced by limited the number of spell levels, but I do have one suggestion. Part of Reaving dispel is a spellcraft check to identify the spells that are being dispelled. Spell effects that are not identified can still be reaved, but the caster would not know the spell level or effects.

I also think the spell should not be modified by your caster level. If you steal a spell it should be treated as if it were cast on you by the same caster at the same time (for duration and power. If it requires concentration you must concentrate to maintain it and if it is dismissible you can dismiss it).

I do like the heal/damage flavor for the lock though. All in all a good invocation.

There is, naturally, the ability to abuse this as it gives you limitless dispel attempts (one of the reasons that while I would like to give warlocks the ability to counterspell with it, it is just too abuseable). I would maybe add fluff limiting the amount of HP that can be healed per encounter by plundering (though ideally you'll be stealing spells more often than eating them)...maybe invoker level * 5, allows you to utilize this evocation fully twice per encounter to heal you (and 5 hp per level is a decent amount for self healing, even if reliant on enemies having spells).

[Barbarian MD]

I agree with you regarding spellcraft; that's a good idea. I'll edit that in.

It would be my understanding that you would have to maintain concentration if the spell you stole called for it. Can it be read otherwise from my wording?

I like the way it deals with caster level. You can fluff it that the magical energies pass through your hands on their way to being redeployed, and like I said--it doesn't affect the duration, so it really only increases the enhancement from, say, magic weapon, or makes the effect more difficult to dispel. I don't immediately see a way that this is terribly overpowered. If you do, let me know and I'll see if there is a way to correct it.

You have just pointed out to me that this does not include counterspells, which were intended when I wrote it. I will have to add that in. I think one of a warlock's greatest assets to the party using this invocation would be as a counterspelling beast, particularly when coupled with a ring of spell battle or that feat from heroes of battle that does the same thing.

[Barbarian MD]

Edits made. Please discuss.