Epic spells: what wouldn't you allow? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Epic spells: what wouldn't you allow? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
BigGus
10-06-07, 12:04 PM I'm trying to put together some guidelines as to what kinds of epic spells would be likely to fail at the "DM approval" stage. Obviously, it won't be a complete list, as there is almost unlimited potential to epic spells, but I wanted to give my players some idea of which kinds of spells are likely to be approved and which not. I've not had that much experience with epic spellcasting, so there are doubtless plenty of abuses I haven't spotted. So I'd like to hear about;

1) Any epic spells you/ your players have tried to create which your DM/ you didn't allow, and why

2) Anything to be wary of in terms of general spell design

Thanks
Amon_WinterfallIV
10-06-07, 03:24 PM I would be wary of the following:

*Epic Spells with a DC 0 cost (So are free and take one day to learn and Cast)
*Epic Spells that Have extremely long durations (for +40, you can increase the duration of an effect by a factor of 1 million, turning a 6 second buff into something like a 3 month buff)
*Epic Spell Combomongering: Gaining a whole pile of Temp HP and then cast a big backlash spell, or some variation of Contingent Rez after an effect that should kill you.
*Spamming: Throwing out a large number of Save or be screwed/die/sorely regret it is a winner--eventually, they are going to roll a 1. Because of the whole 'roll a 1 factor', adding more rolls is much more powerful than simply increasing the DC.
*Time Travel (Seriously!)
*Permanent power increases (ie, you permanently gain a profane/sacred/alchemical/inherent/luck/natural/Amon bonus forever to a stat.)
BillTheManiac
10-06-07, 06:15 PM I would be wary of the following:

*Epic Spells with a DC 0 cost (So are free and take one day to learn and Cast)
Make that ritual spells. Any other kind of spell at DC 0 would suck, bad, so who cares.
*Epic Spells that Have extremely long durations (for +40, you can increase the duration of an effect by a factor of 1 million, turning a 6 second buff into something like a 3 month buff)
Rejoice! It doesn't work that way. It's linear.
*Epic Spell Combomongering: Gaining a whole pile of Temp HP and then cast a big backlash spell, or some variation of Contingent Rez after an effect that should kill you.
Yeah, that can get overpowered.
*Spamming: Throwing out a large number of Save or be screwed/die/sorely regret it is a winner--eventually, they are going to roll a 1. Because of the whole 'roll a 1 factor', adding more rolls is much more powerful than simply increasing the DC.
*Time Travel (Seriously!)
*Permanent power increases (ie, you permanently gain a profane/sacred/alchemical/inherent/luck/natural/Amon bonus forever to a stat.)
Puritan13
10-06-07, 07:07 PM I allow anything as long as your character has the resources to create the spell, and the spellcraft to cast the spell, with the caveat that you can't lower a spells DC below it's lowest seeds base DC.
BigGus
10-07-07, 08:30 PM Thanks Amon, I hadn't thought of any of those except the Time Travel one (far too easily abused). Having thought about it, I've come up with:

Definitely not: giving yourself divine ranks, extra levels, or anything of that sort

Wary of: giving yourself immunity to anything you can only give yourself resistance to in the seed descriptions, and giving gigantic bonuses to one thing, especially ability scores

Anyone else got any suggestions?
Starmage21
10-10-07, 04:25 PM I would not allow:

Any spell with a negative spellcraft DC, or otherwise screaming loud "brokennation" at me.
DC 0 is fine, as the precedent set by D&D3.5 is that 0 counts as 1/2 for stuff like this. DC0 spells to me cost 4500gp to create and 4500/25 xp as normal.

Any spell that is horridly abusive, especially of the ritual-casting rules. I tend to allow some spells that do use limited ritual casting, even if some followers are involved, depending on the effects. Those spells I do allow into my game, I try to remind the player that while all these followers might be back at "home base" for you to cast it the first time, theyre probobly not going to be available if the spell gets dispelled mid-adventure. It usually is enough for them to tone things down or rethink the effect they wanted to create.

Any spell that I think might negatively affect my campaign. I actually havent had any of these yet because my players are usually aware of what they can or cannot get away with. In general, the less non-RAW adjudication I have to do, the better.

Any spell that would create such a large power gap between the PCs that the players start to feel left behind.
Sagetim
10-16-07, 10:51 PM I wouldn't allow them to have an epic spell that would let them destroy the sun. They can do that the old fashioned way, using non epic means.
rob_douglas
10-17-07, 08:51 AM I think that to handle Epic Spells, you want to take a bit more control. Rather than thinking of Epic Spells as a toy store that you can pick a bunch of pieces up and pay certain prices for, think of it as guidelines for the DM in judging power. Now, the PCs should describe the kind of spell they are researching, and then they do just that - research it - and you as the DM decide when they find it, and what the mitigating factors and ultimate cost are. So for example, some people would let the PCs go off and design an Superb Dispelling that doesn't have a 10d6 backlash component. But you could decide that there is only 1 Superb Dispelling spell that is in the range that people are looking for and that it HAS to have the backlash - that it always does. The research doesn't invent a new spell so much as find the formula for one that exists external to the character.

In this way, you control all the custom tweaking, and therefore can disallow easily, any spell that takes advantage of mitigating factors - which brings me to what I would not allow:

Any spell that uses mitigating factors that are not really mitigating:

Long casting times if there is no in game penalty for taking 100 days off

Rituals when there is no chance of the Ritual failing and no chance that it gets interrupted, and doesn't really cost anything by taking out another caster for any appreciable game-changing time

Arbitrary minimal backlash damage or other factors that just don't have anything to do with and make no sense with the spell being developed.

Everything should work as a cohesive whole. I do think there are Epic Spells that can grant divinity even - but at what cost is the question. ;) And it has to be a real cost, a real chance of failure.

ROB

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
BigGus 10-06-07, 12:04 PM	I'm trying to put together some guidelines as to what kinds of epic spells would be likely to fail at the "DM approval" stage. Obviously, it won't be a complete list, as there is almost unlimited potential to epic spells, but I wanted to give my players some idea of which kinds of spells are likely to be approved and which not. I've not had that much experience with epic spellcasting, so there are doubtless plenty of abuses I haven't spotted. So I'd like to hear about; 1) Any epic spells you/ your players have tried to create which your DM/ you didn't allow, and why 2) Anything to be wary of in terms of general spell design Thanks
Amon_WinterfallIV 10-06-07, 03:24 PM	I would be wary of the following: Epic Spells with a DC 0 cost (So are free and take one day to learn and Cast) Epic Spells that Have extremely long durations (for +40, you can increase the duration of an effect by a factor of 1 million, turning a 6 second buff into something like a 3 month buff) Epic Spell Combomongering: Gaining a whole pile of Temp HP and then cast a big backlash spell, or some variation of Contingent Rez after an effect that should kill you. Spamming: Throwing out a large number of Save or be screwed/die/sorely regret it is a winner--eventually, they are going to roll a 1. Because of the whole 'roll a 1 factor', adding more rolls is much more powerful than simply increasing the DC. Time Travel (Seriously!) Permanent power increases (ie, you permanently gain a profane/sacred/alchemical/inherent/luck/natural/Amon bonus forever to a stat.)
BillTheManiac 10-06-07, 06:15 PM	I would be wary of the following: Epic Spells with a DC 0 cost (So are free and take one day to learn and Cast) Make that ritual spells. Any other kind of spell at DC 0 would suck, bad, so who cares. Epic Spells that Have extremely long durations (for +40, you can increase the duration of an effect by a factor of 1 million, turning a 6 second buff into something like a 3 month buff) Rejoice! It doesn't work that way. It's linear. Epic Spell Combomongering: Gaining a whole pile of Temp HP and then cast a big backlash spell, or some variation of Contingent Rez after an effect that should kill you. Yeah, that can get overpowered. Spamming: Throwing out a large number of Save or be screwed/die/sorely regret it is a winner--eventually, they are going to roll a 1. Because of the whole 'roll a 1 factor', adding more rolls is much more powerful than simply increasing the DC. Time Travel (Seriously!) Permanent power increases (ie, you permanently gain a profane/sacred/alchemical/inherent/luck/natural/Amon bonus forever to a stat.)
Puritan13 10-06-07, 07:07 PM	I allow anything as long as your character has the resources to create the spell, and the spellcraft to cast the spell, with the caveat that you can't lower a spells DC below it's lowest seeds base DC.
BigGus 10-07-07, 08:30 PM	Thanks Amon, I hadn't thought of any of those except the Time Travel one (far too easily abused). Having thought about it, I've come up with: Definitely not: giving yourself divine ranks, extra levels, or anything of that sort Wary of: giving yourself immunity to anything you can only give yourself resistance to in the seed descriptions, and giving gigantic bonuses to one thing, especially ability scores Anyone else got any suggestions?
Starmage21 10-10-07, 04:25 PM	I would not allow: Any spell with a negative spellcraft DC, or otherwise screaming loud "brokennation" at me. DC 0 is fine, as the precedent set by D&D3.5 is that 0 counts as 1/2 for stuff like this. DC0 spells to me cost 4500gp to create and 4500/25 xp as normal. Any spell that is horridly abusive, especially of the ritual-casting rules. I tend to allow some spells that do use limited ritual casting, even if some followers are involved, depending on the effects. Those spells I do allow into my game, I try to remind the player that while all these followers might be back at "home base" for you to cast it the first time, theyre probobly not going to be available if the spell gets dispelled mid-adventure. It usually is enough for them to tone things down or rethink the effect they wanted to create. Any spell that I think might negatively affect my campaign. I actually havent had any of these yet because my players are usually aware of what they can or cannot get away with. In general, the less non-RAW adjudication I have to do, the better. Any spell that would create such a large power gap between the PCs that the players start to feel left behind.
Sagetim 10-16-07, 10:51 PM	I wouldn't allow them to have an epic spell that would let them destroy the sun. They can do that the old fashioned way, using non epic means.
rob_douglas 10-17-07, 08:51 AM	I think that to handle Epic Spells, you want to take a bit more control. Rather than thinking of Epic Spells as a toy store that you can pick a bunch of pieces up and pay certain prices for, think of it as guidelines for the DM in judging power. Now, the PCs should describe the kind of spell they are researching, and then they do just that - research it - and you as the DM decide when they find it, and what the mitigating factors and ultimate cost are. So for example, some people would let the PCs go off and design an Superb Dispelling that doesn't have a 10d6 backlash component. But you could decide that there is only 1 Superb Dispelling spell that is in the range that people are looking for and that it HAS to have the backlash - that it always does. The research doesn't invent a new spell so much as find the formula for one that exists external to the character. In this way, you control all the custom tweaking, and therefore can disallow easily, any spell that takes advantage of mitigating factors - which brings me to what I would not allow: Any spell that uses mitigating factors that are not really mitigating: Long casting times if there is no in game penalty for taking 100 days off Rituals when there is no chance of the Ritual failing and no chance that it gets interrupted, and doesn't really cost anything by taking out another caster for any appreciable game-changing time Arbitrary minimal backlash damage or other factors that just don't have anything to do with and make no sense with the spell being developed. Everything should work as a cohesive whole. I do think there are Epic Spells that can grant divinity even - but at what cost is the question. ;) And it has to be a real cost, a real chance of failure. ROB