Post/Author/DateTime	Post
goro 04-09-07, 01:19 PM	QUESTION 1 Are these things plausible from a wish/miracle spell? +1 Bab... normal Bab fighter lvl.19 +19/+14/+9/+4 increased to +20/+15/+10/+5 (and then at lvl 20 it becomes +21/+16/+11/+6/+1)? An epic feat at non-epic levels? Or if not then an epic feat in exchange for a normal feat you already possess or are about to acquire? QUESTION 2 Does spell immunity and greater spell immunity protect you from the specified spell or spells if their spell levels have been altered, over 4th.. or 8th in the case of greater spell immunity, by metamagic feats? QUESTION 3 Do these stack? Bracers of armor... Amulet of natural armor... Ring of protection..? Mantle of great stealth (ELH pg.146).. Fortification (ELH pg.139)...? Epic speed feat (ELH pg.54)... Monk speed... Boots of Swiftness...? QUESTION 4 Is there a spell other than spell resistance that grants a better spell resistance? Or a spell that improves your own spell resistance other than IMPROVED SPELL RESISTANCE (pg. 60 ELH)? QUESTION 5 IMPROVED METAMAGIC [EPIC]... 1. Fireball /3 + quicken spell /4 + empower spell /2 + improved metamagic (1) = 8th level spell or 2. Fireball /3 + quicken spell /4 + empower spell /2 + improved metamagic (1) = 7th level spell QUESTION 6 Since the Monk can fight using his whole body as weapons can he benefit from the multi-attack fighting feat tree (multiweapon fighting, greater multiweapon fighting, perfect multiweapon fighting)? Two(2) hands and two (2) feet equal four(4) weapons.
Witch 04-09-07, 01:24 PM	Are these things plausible from a wish/miracle spell? +1 Bab... normal Bab fighter lvl.19 +19/+14/+9/+4 increased to +20/+15/+10/+5 (and then at lvl 20 it becomes +21/+16/+11/+6/+1)? An epic feat at non-epic levels? Or if not then an epic feat in exchange for a normal feat you already possess or are about to acquire? No. Does spell immunity and greater spell immunity protect you from the specified spell or spells if their spell levels have been altered, over 4th.. or 8th in the case of greater spell immunity, by metamagic feats? Yes. IMPROVED METAMAGIC [EPIC]... 1. Fireball /3 + quicken spell /4 + empower spell /2 + improved metamagic (1) = 8th level spell or 2. Fireball /3 + quicken spell /4 + empower spell /2 + improved metamagic (1) = 7th level spell The second, by the rules. I'd personally rule the first, however. Since the Monk can fight using his whole body as weapons can he benefit from the multi-attack fighting feat tree (multiweapon fighting, greater multiweapon fighting, perfect multiweapon fighting)? No. Unarmed Strike counts only as a single weapon.
rob_douglas 04-09-07, 05:28 PM	QUESTION 1 Are these things plausible from a wish/miracle spell? +1 Bab... normal Bab fighter lvl.19 +19/+14/+9/+4 increased to +20/+15/+10/+5 (and then at lvl 20 it becomes +21/+16/+11/+6/+1)? No, you can't change your BAB. An epic feat at non-epic levels? Or if not then an epic feat in exchange for a normal feat you already possess or are about to acquire? This really depends on the DM. It could get out of hand, so the DM should be very careful, and might even make some changes. Probably not though, as an Epic Feat is a lot more valuable than a magic item, like 100,000gp+, and a WISH can't make one that valuable. QUESTION 2 Does spell immunity and greater spell immunity protect you from the specified spell or spells if their spell levels have been altered, over 4th.. or 8th in the case of greater spell immunity, by metamagic feats? Yes - even if it is Heightened. It even works if the spell is on 2 spell lists, where one list has it as a higher value. As long as it exists in a low enough level form, it is blocked. QUESTION 3 Do these stack? Bracers of armor... Amulet of natural armor... Ring of protection..? Of course - this is not even Epic. They grant an Armor bonus, an enhancement bonus to natural armor, and a deflection bonus respectively. Mantle of great stealth (ELH pg.146).. Fortification (ELH pg.139)...? You mean can you put Fortification on the Mantle? No, not by the rules. Mantle is a cloak slot, and Fortification goes on an armor slot item that has at least a +1 enhancement bonus to armor. Epic speed feat (ELH pg.54)... Monk speed... Boots of Swiftness...? Ugh, this is a toughy... Boots of Swiftness were not updated with 3.5E, they should be like Boots of Speed, but grant continuous Haste, instead of rounds per day. As such, they would not increase Monk speed, because Monk Speed is an enhancement bonus, as is Haste. I believe this still applied in 3E, but maybe some of the Monk speed was not an enhancement bonus. The Epic Speed feat is badly written, and should just say it is an enhancement bonus, because that would then have the desired result of not stacking (it says it doesn't in the text) with an exception being that it stacks with fast movement enhancement from a class feature (such as Barbarians and monks). QUESTION 4 Is there a spell other than spell resistance that grants a better spell resistance? Or a spell that improves your own spell resistance other than IMPROVED SPELL RESISTANCE (pg. 60 ELH)? There is Mass Spell Resistance, but I think that spell is broken, because it overpowers Holy Aura as soon as you can afford it, and the cap is pretty high. See the Spell Compendium for it. QUESTION 5 IMPROVED METAMAGIC [EPIC]... 1. Fireball /3 + quicken spell /4 + empower spell /2 + improved metamagic (1) = 8th level spell or 2. Fireball /3 + quicken spell /4 + empower spell /2 + improved metamagic (1) = 7th level spell Under 3.0, it was the second, but the rewrite in the DMG strongly implies the first, but it is still ambiguous. Consensus on the boards seems to be for the first, but with a minimum of 1 level per metamagic added (i.e. still, silent, empower with IMx2 would not get you a +2 total, but a +3 total in extra levels QUESTION 6 Since the Monk can fight using his whole body as weapons can he benefit from the multi-attack fighting feat tree (multiweapon fighting, greater multiweapon fighting, perfect multiweapon fighting)? Two(2) hands and two (2) feet equal four(4) weapons. I thought I read that they could take advantage of 2-weapon fighting. Maybe that was only if they also carried a separate weapon. If you allow that, then you open a huge can of worms - they could argue they get head, elbows, hands, feet, and knees for 9 attacks x3 = 27, 36 if you can get BAB up to +16 with Divine Power or something. I think Witch is right on this - Unarmed Strikes are 1 weapon total, and you could add another weapon. I wouldn't allow multiweapon fighting for anything that doesn't have a racial benefit of multiple appendages. ROB
bluemage55 04-09-07, 05:43 PM	It is possible to use two-weapon fighting with a weapon in your hand(s) and unarmed strikes at the same time. If you have the necessary feats, fighting with a greatsword and unarmed strikes as your off-hand attacks has a very high damage potential.
goro 04-09-07, 06:17 PM	No, you can't change your BAB. Damn. Quote: Since the Monk can fight using his whole body as weapons can he benefit from the multi-attack fighting feat tree (multiweapon fighting, greater multiweapon fighting, perfect multiweapon fighting)? No. Unarmed Strike counts only as a single weapon. Damn again. Quote: Mantle of great stealth (ELH pg.146).. Fortification (ELH pg.139)...? You mean can you put Fortification on the Mantle? No, not by the rules. Mantle is a cloak slot, and Fortification goes on an armor slot item that has at least a +1 enhancement bonus to armor. EPIC MAGIC ITEMS 1: Epic SRD Fortification: This rod functions as a +3 light mace. In addition, it is useful for the construction and defense of fortifications. Whenever the wielder is benefiting from cover, the rod improves that to nine-tenths cover (+10 cover AC bonus and +4 cover Reflex save bonus; failure on the save results in half damage and success results in no damage). Three times per day, the rod can create food and water, as per the cleric spell, for twenty-four people. The rod also has the following powers: Fortify: Four times per day, a stone wall can be created that is 12 inches thick, 10 feet high, and 30 feet long. This wall has a parapet and battlements across the top. (Alternatively, the power can be used to mend a broken existing wall. The gap to be filled can be no more than 300 square feet in area.) In addition, once per day, a great door of iron can be created that is set into one of the newly created walls. This door, 4 inches thick, may be a double door, a drawbridge, or a portcullis, as chosen by the wielder. Siege Engine: One heavy catapult, two light catapults, or three ballistae may be generated with each use of this power. The power can be used four times per day. Ammunition for 20 shots is included with each weapon created. Caster Level: 24th; Prerequisites: Craft Rod, Craft Epic Rod, Craft Magic Arms and Armor, inter-posing hand, create food and water, major creation, wall of iron, wall of stone; Market Price: 465,665 gp; Cost to Create: 231,985 gp + 14,634 XP.
rob_douglas 04-10-07, 10:45 AM	OH I see - the Rod of Fortification...I misunderstood (should have looked up the page number). You are asking if the cover bonus from the Rod stacks with or improves the concealment granted by the mantle. This is a 2-part answer. The first part is that cover and concealment were updated in 3.5, so you need to modify the two items to match the new rules. The Mantle grants blur like concealment, so use the same rules, so it stays a 20% miss chance. It is just called concealment and not half-concealment anymore, but no game-affecting changes. The Rod is a different story. 9/10ths cover no longer exists, but I think that you can just use the rule that it makes cover better, doubling the cover bonuses to +8AC, and +4 Reflex Save, and granting Improved Evasion against such attacks. See PHB page 151-152. Cover and concealment do not so much stack as take effect at the same time. You get the AC bonus and save bonus, and if they try to hit you, they have to get past the miss chance as well. ROB
Aracor 04-10-07, 12:34 PM	I only disagree with one answer that's been given. Does spell immunity and greater spell immunity protect you from the specified spell or spells if their spell levels have been altered, over 4th.. or 8th in the case of greater spell immunity, by metamagic feats?NO. It does not. Spell immunity, or greater spell immunity, have a maximum power level they can protect from. If, for example, a maze spell is heightened to 9th level, its power is now beyond greater spell immunity's protection, because it is treated IN ALL WAYS as a 9th level spell. It's like trying to name energy drain for greater spell immunity. The name is more of a convenience factor. According to spell immunity, "The spells must be of 4th level or lower." When heighten spell makes the spell a higher level, then it's beyond the power of spell immunity to protect against. If it was just the name that mattered, someone could natter their way around the spell entirely by saying 'I'm not casting disintegrate, I'm casting Baleful Bolt of Destructive Energy! It's NOT disintegrate even though the mechanics are exactly the same!'. No. The names are simply a convenience factor. Note, heighten spell is the only feat that can adjust the spell level as it pertains to this spell; same as heightening a spell will allow it to penetration a globe of invulnerability effect.
Witch 04-10-07, 12:37 PM	If it was just the name that mattered, someone could natter their way around the spell entirely by saying 'I'm not casting disintegrate, I'm casting Baleful Bolt of Destructive Energy! It's NOT disintegrate even though the mechanics are exactly the same!'. No. The names are simply a convenience factor. No, the names are not simply a convenience factor. A Heightened Disintegrate is still a Disintegrate. Spell Immunity wards against spells, not against metamagiced versions of spells.
Aracor 04-10-07, 01:08 PM	No, the names are not simply a convenience factor. A Heightened Disintegrate is still a Disintegrate. Spell Immunity wards against spells, not against metamagiced versions of spells.Wait a minute. You just contradicted yourself. If it wards against spells, not metamagicked versions of spells, then it wouldn't even protect against EMPOWERED disintegrate. And it protects against spells of a maximum spell level. If that level is overcome, the protection does NOT stand.
Witch 04-10-07, 01:10 PM	I didn't contradict myself at all. I said it protects against the base spell. Whether it is altered by any metamagic feat doesn't matter at all. What I said is that if you cast Spell Immunity, you can't say "I protect myself against a Magic Missile heightened to fourth level". You can say "I protect myself against Magic Missile", which will also protect you from that heightened version.
Aracor 04-10-07, 01:49 PM	So you're saying that if I make a spell that functions in all ways as fireball, but call it flameball, that unless someone knows the name of MY spell they can't defend against it with spell immunity. I don't think so.
Witch 04-10-07, 01:50 PM	I'm not too sure about that yet, but I might well agree with that, provided you actually spend the resources to research the spell.
Aracor 04-10-07, 01:55 PM	I'm not too sure about that yet, but I might well agree with that, provided you actually spend the resources to research the spell.There's nothing in the rules that says you can't use your two free spells per level to learn something not in the books. They're the product of your 'research'. Let's try another tactic. Say it is the name. I cast 'spell immunity', and include the flame strike spell as one that I'm immune to, since it's on the list for druids as fourth level. If a cleric casts flame strike on me, (flame strike is a 5th level cleric spell), does it affect me?
Witch 04-10-07, 01:56 PM	If a cleric casts flame strike on me, (flame strike is a 5th level cleric spell), does it affect me? No.
Aracor 04-10-07, 02:00 PM	DESPITE the fact that spell immunity says it will only protect up to level 4 spells?
Witch 04-10-07, 02:05 PM	Greater Spell Immunity doesn't say that. But yes, despire the fact that spell immunity says that, because Flame Strike is a level 4 spell for the druid.
Aracor 04-10-07, 02:20 PM	Greater Spell Immunity doesn't say that. But yes, despire the fact that spell immunity says that, because Flame Strike is a level 4 spell for the druid.Honestly, I think you're giving spell immunity way more credit than it deserves. So would you prevent a flame strike cast by a cleric from harming someone inside a globe of invulnerability as well?
rob_douglas 04-10-07, 02:22 PM	(Edit: I changed my mind in the course of this post, so read all the way....) My argument that Heighten doesn't matter is based on the text stating that it protects against specific spells. Take Antipathy for example. It is 8th level, or 9th for a Druid. So would GSI protect against Antipathy, or only against Antipathy cast by non-druids? Since the spell exists as an 8th level spell, it can be protected against, and you don't have to keep a separate list of when that spell might not be protected against. You just mark it on the sheet - GSI (Antipathy) - done. Yes, Heighten gets through globes of invulnerability, but those specifially protect against levels, whereas Spell Immunity protects against spells, limited to a particular power level - and just because it is harder to cast for a subset of casters doesn't make it a more powerful spell. Other spells that share this property of being on both sides of SI or GSI: Blight, Cure Critical (and Mass), Dispel Chaos/Evil, Dominate Person, Flame Strike, Hold Monster, Ice Storm, Inflict Critical (and Mass), Mark of Justice, Scrying, Sympathy, and Wall of Fire. There are some heavy hitters up there - I am not comfortable with Dominate Person and Flame Strike failing against Spell Immunity. (Edit: I am going to leave the above in to show my thought process, but after going through the list, I am not sure that my original ruling is right.) It is clear that the answer is unclear. The answer to whether or not Heighten can break Spell Immunity should be the same as whether or not Spell Immunity can protect against a cleric's Flame Strike, since it is a Druid 4th level spell. I am starting to think no - use the spell level at the time of casting to see if it is blocked by the immunity. Then there are Shadow Evocations - are they treated as the duplicated spell or as that spell for purposes of Spell Immunity? And what about PrCs that grant spells, maybe at a lower level - adding a PrC to a game could change some spells to now be on the list of ones that suddenly could be subject to Spell Immunity. That would be bad. I think it has to be based off the level of spell as cast by the caster. This is not affected by other metamagic enhancements, an empowered fireball is still a fireball for purposes of Spell Immunity. But a Heightened to 5th one is not. In other words, I now agree with Aracor, and not Witch. And yes, that contradicts my first post. ROB
Witch 04-10-07, 02:28 PM	Rob - I'm going to pull out the big one, here. Blasphemy heightened to ninth level. Do you stand by your ruling?
Aracor 04-10-07, 02:36 PM	Rob - I'm going to pull out the big one, here. Blasphemy heightened to ninth level. Do you stand by your ruling?I do. I just stand in a silenced area while I do it :D Also, I'm pretty sure I've seen a ruling that supports that, but I haven't been able to find it. I'll keep looking though.
Witch 04-10-07, 02:38 PM	I'm going to point out that Blasphemy is the main reason for what I'm doing here. Note that Silence isn't a good remedy, as it negates your own spells as well.
Aracor 04-10-07, 02:52 PM	I'm going to point out that Blasphemy is the main reason for what I'm doing here. Note that Silence isn't a good remedy, as it negates your own spells as well. Your way also creates an incredible amount of bookkeeping. You basically need to know what level a spell is for any spell list. If you can find someone with a maze spell on their list as a fourth level spell, that would justify spell immunity protecting from an 8th level wizard spell, as well as several other spells. That's way to much credit to a fourth level spell.
goro 04-10-07, 03:15 PM	Wouldn't SI & GSI operate similar to the way counterspelling works in regard to spells altered through metamagic feats? PHB pg.170-171 Metamagic feats are not taken into account whendetermining whether a spell can be countered. For example a normal Fireball can counter a maximized Fireball( that is a fireball that has been enhanced by the metamagic feat Maximize Spell) and vice versa.
Aracor 04-10-07, 03:56 PM	Nope, that rule specifically applies to counterspelling. Although a similar rule applies. I'm positive that the spell level to be used is what it's cast at, so as long as the spell isn't higher level than the defense (and I'll see if I can verify that when I get home from work); such as a cleric's flame strike torching someone who would normally be immune. However, an empowered flame strike cast by a druid is still treated as a fourth level spell; even though it takes up a sixth level slot. So spell immunity would still protect against it. As I said, heighten is the exception, because it's the only metamagic feat that actually changes the level is treated as, rather than just the slot-level. A fireball could still counter a heightened fireball; but spell immunity just isn't capable of stopping a 5th level spell.
SirGeshko 04-10-07, 03:59 PM	First, I'll settle the Heighten Spell issue: HEIGHTEN SPELL [METAMAGIC] Benefit: A heightened spell has a higher spell level than normal (up to a maximum of 9th level). Unlike other metamagic feats, Heighten Spell actually increases the effective level of the spell that it modifies. All effects dependent on spell level (such as saving throw DCs and ability to penetrate a lesser globe of invulnerability) are calculated according to the heightened level. The heightened spell is as difficult to prepare and cast as a spell of its effective level. (Emphasis mine) I'm going to say SI and GSI work the same way as the Globes of Invulnerability, and are dependent on the Spell Level as it is cast. ~Flame strike by a druid (4th lvl), no effect. ~By a cleric, (5th)? You take damage as normal. ~By a druid who has used Heighten spell to boost flame strike to 5th level? take damage just as if a cleric had cast it. ~Blasphemy Heightened to 9th level? Yep. Although the increased spell level has no effect on caster level, it would bump the save DC for the banishment effect up 2, to be on par with the casters other 9th level spells.
rob_douglas 04-10-07, 04:45 PM	Witch's point is a good one. He is not arguing about the RAW, but balance. Blasphemy et al are among the most abusive spells at epic, especially if you go with Cosmic Descryer, and other ways of boosting caster level. Mainly because of the die no save if 10 levels lower issue. GSI is the only defense against it, until you make an Epic Ward. And that spell totally destroys high Level Adjustment creatures (e.g. Solar). That a Solar PC (ECL 36) has no protection short of Epic Spellcasting against a Heightened Blasphemy from a 32nd level caster could be an issue. But it is a specific attack, and a specific vulnerability of that build, and I am inclined to think it might be fine. I still think the actual spell level of the casting class using its spell level should determine immunity for that - because you can't keep track of all the PrC spell lists, and I am sure there is one out there that de-leveled a 5th level spell from the core rules. But I could be persuaded not to allow Heighten to break Immunity. I am still not sure the RAW is entirely clear on this. So ultimately, the DM will have to make a ruling for his own game. (I hate fence-sittting, but here I am again, back on it...) ROB
bluemage55 04-10-07, 04:49 PM	For the bookkeeping issue, I would say that when you cast the spell, you can name any spell at all. The spell rhen simply fails to block a spell when it is cast at too high a level (whether due to class lists or Heighten Spell). For example, I cast SI and I name maze. In the event that I encounter a spellcaster who actually has maze as a 4th-level spell, it will be blocked. For most scenarios, however, it will simply fail.
rob_douglas 04-11-07, 06:33 PM	Witch - I thought about your Blasphemy example, and I came up with a counter. Or at least a question - how would you rule the situation where someone uses Miracle to duplicate a spell effect - such as Blasphemy et al? Would it be blocked by Greater Spell Immunity (Blasphemy) or not? The same should apply for Limited Wish and Wish, as well as for Shadow Conjuration/Evocation, Greater versions of those, and Shades. Should you have to pick each of those to be immune to, or does Spell Immunity (Fireball) also protect against Greater Shadow Evocation (Fireball)? You could rule either way - that the spell is protecting from even faked spells or that it only protects against the specific spell. So far I still think I am comfortable with allowing Heighten to bypass SI and GSI. ROB
bluemage55 04-11-07, 06:41 PM	I would rule that since miracle, limited wish, and wish effectively heighten the spell, it would get through SI and GSI.
Witch 04-11-07, 06:45 PM	Darnit, those're valid counter points. I'll need to re-evaluate my entire thoughts on Blasphemy now (given the fact that I don't like the Ward seed).
goro 04-11-07, 09:11 PM	Does the BEGUILERs' spell resistance penetration only work when the target is denied his/her DEX bonus to AC like his spell save DC, or is it constant regardless of the targets status?
Aracor 04-11-07, 11:51 PM	Easiest counter to blasphemy is Energy Immunity: Sonic. Since blasphemy is a sonic subtype, complete immunity makes it simply not work. Problem solved.
bluemage55 04-12-07, 01:54 AM	Easiest counter to blasphemy is Energy Immunity: Sonic. Since blasphemy is a sonic subtype, complete immunity makes it simply not work. Problem solved. Incorrect. Energy immunity protects you only from damage. You can still suffer nasty side effects such as drowning in acid or going deaf from a sonic attack.
Aracor 04-12-07, 10:43 AM	Incorrect. Energy immunity protects you only from damage. You can still suffer nasty side effects such as drowning in acid or going deaf from a sonic attack. Hmmm...I stand corrected. So yeah; silence it is. Or counterspell. Although personally I think the problem with blasphemy is similar to RAW spells such as divine power (BAB == CL). They should just cap. I wouldn't consider it unreasonable to cap blasphemy at an 'effective' caster level 25 for calculating the effects of the spell. It's still a good spell then, but it's not going to let someone jump their caster level into the stratosphere and kill everyone in sight with a 7th level spell. And yeah; the point is, if the problem is that ONE spell, why change an entire mechanic rather than the one abusive spell?