Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Maesto 02-01-06, 08:20 PM	First of all, I think unluck should be restricted, especially as it can be chained very easily. As a third level spell, it's ridiculously powerful. Secondly, can we add something in the training animals part about animal companions? Do they start with some tricks? Also, I thought that animals got 3 tricks per point of intelligence, not one. Lastly, Omen of Peril is listed twice in the spell listing - one is RD, one is SC, and SC is out of alphabetical order. See page 31. Thanks, ~Jolyon
solbergb 02-02-06, 01:20 PM	First of all, I think unluck should be restricted, especially as it can be chained very easily. As a third level spell, it's ridiculously powerful. ~Jolyon Except that it has a saving throw and is SR=yes. Chained, the save is at -5. A 6th level spell with save DC of 13+int/cha for the primary and 8+int/cha for the secondaries isn't something I'm going to lose any sleep over. (who has a sorcerer with chain spell and who looked at Unluck because it fit neatly with fatespinner flavor, but just couldn't see it actually working in real play very well - if I can make them fail a save, I can do worse to them than force rerolls)
MaxDog 02-02-06, 03:15 PM	Secondly, can we add something in the training animals part about animal companions? Do they start with some tricks? Also, I thought that animals got 3 tricks per point of intelligence, not one. Yes, they get 3 tricks per point of int (plus bonuses as they advance) -- and that hasn't changed in this go around: p40:"Your animal companion at the start of an adventure can be trained with its full compliment of tricks (3 for every point of Intelligence plus bonus tricks as indicated in the PHB)." I would like a little more clarification on exactly how many tricks domesticated animals start with. Again, from p. 40: "Domesticated Animals: Most animals you can buy and adventure with are trained to some extent. [snip] Almost all of these animals (except donkeys and mules) can perform the basic attack trick, detailed on page 74 of the PHB under Handle Animal." [snip] "When you buy an animal, you may pick an extra trick for each point of Intelligence the animal has. You must pick the tricks from page 74 of the PHB under Handle Animal. For the riding dog, you may either pick two extra tricks or use these two trick slots to make the dog trained to use a trip attack (as specified in the riding dog entry in the Monster Manual v.3.5). Animals gained that start play with more than the standard training must be supported with campaign or regional documentation." Putting these together, I conclude that domesticated animals (other than mules and donkeys) come with the attack trick, leaving them with either five (int 2 animal) or two (int 1 animal) trick slots that you can fill by using the Handle Animal skill as outlined later in the text. If you purchase a riding dog (Int 3 = six trick slots) it comes with the attack trick and either: 1) a trip attack and three empty trick slots; or 2) five empty trick slots. Again, the empty trick slots are filled by using HA and TU's to train the animal. Whether I am correct or not, I would like to see the language made more clear -- I keep running into the debate about riding dogs having eight trick slots (I mean, I knew dogs were smart, but...) On another animal issue, I would like some language added to address armor proficency and animals. Specifically: Do animals require armor proficeincy to avoid penalties from barding? LEHaskell
Mad Monkey 02-02-06, 07:59 PM	Animals do require armor proficiency to avoid the penalties of barding (see the description of the Animal type in the MM). Only animals that are trained for war are proficient with armor. Thus to the new rules only warhorses are proficient with armor, as riding dogs no longer can be bought trained for war, but only with the ability to trip. If it will be allowed to train animals for war (even only through additional campaign documentation), it would be nice to know what a character must do as I haven't found any rules about it.
tombollis 02-02-06, 09:31 PM	The section on tricks is only slightly clearer than in earlier LGCSs (mainly with respect to riding dogs and trip). I still read it as implying, even more than in earlier updates, that domestic animals can be purchased with 4 tricks per point of Int, and that they can be taught more later via the Handle Animal skill. First, consider the word "extra", implying "more than normal": "When you buy an animal, you may pick an extra trick for each point of Intelligence the animal has. You must pick the tricks from page 74 of the PHB under Handle Animal. For the riding dog, you may either pick two extra tricks or use these two trick slots to make the dog trained to use a trip attack (as specified in the riding dog entry in the Monster Manual v.3.5). Animals gained that start play with more than the standard training must be supported with campaign or regional documentation." Note that this also seems to imply that a riding dog can only be trained to use a trip attack at the time of purchase. Thus, an animal can be purchased knowing 4 tricks per point of Int (one extra). An Int 2 riding dog can start with normal max plus 2 extra tricks (thus 8), or with the normal max plus be trained to use a trip attack like a wolf (no longer says the confusing "trained for war"). Any other extra starting tricks require "campaign or regional documentation" (but the LGCS is campaign documentation for the extra tricks mentioned in the quote). That the LGCS still says you can use the Handle Animal skill to train an animal beyond the normal max of 3 tricks per point of Int (or the extra with a purchased animal, or the bonus skills of an animal companion) follows from: "Domesticated Animals: Most animals you can buy and adventure with are trained to some extent. These animals include those listed on Table 7-8 of the Player's Handbook v.3.5. The Handle Animal skill can be used to further train these animals." and "Characters with the Handle Animal skill can train their animals further." I have commented on this every update, but have not so much as seen a single comment by a Circle member on the issue, so I can only assume that my interpretation is correct. Tom Bollis
Matherion 02-03-06, 07:48 AM	Except that it has a saving throw and is SR=yes. Chained, the save is at -5. A 6th level spell with save DC of 13+int/cha for the primary and 8+int/cha for the secondaries isn't something I'm going to lose any sleep over. (who has a sorcerer with chain spell and who looked at Unluck because it fit neatly with fatespinner flavor, but just couldn't see it actually working in real play very well - if I can make them fail a save, I can do worse to them than force rerolls) I have seen how well this spell works in play with the save being a will save it is really effective vs poor will save types and with the ability to chain it is worth throwing some the way of those with good will saves . what I believe jolyon was refering to with the too easy to chain is that metamagic rods of chain spell are available and using a third level spell to dramatically decrease the damage opponets deal ,thier ability to make a save ,the chance of hitting and of being able to cause a critical. and the save dc is still fairly decent even with the penalty for chain primary save can easily be 19 with secondarys being 14 and there are a lot of creatures with poor or average will saves. even without the chaining causing a single opponent to roll twice for everything involving dice and taking the worst breaks mods as it means your opponent is more likley to fail the next save effect sent his way so more damage Jeff
Maesto 02-03-06, 08:27 AM	The DCs are reduced by 4, not 5, and in my case, the primary target cops a DC 24 saving throw, and 12 minions take DC 20... it's not pretty at all. Even a single casting of the spell (not chained) can basically break the combat; and for goodness' sake; it's a third level spell.
Mad Monkey 02-03-06, 08:41 AM	First, consider the word "extra", implying "more than normal": "When you buy an animal, you may pick an extra trick for each point of Intelligence the animal has. You must pick the tricks from page 74 of the PHB under Handle Animal. For the riding dog, you may either pick two extra tricks or use these two trick slots to make the dog trained to use a trip attack (as specified in the riding dog entry in the Monster Manual v.3.5). Animals gained that start play with more than the standard training must be supported with campaign or regional documentation." To me it means that you pick two extra tricks besides the attack trick the animal already has, not that it has two extra tricks above the maximum for its intelligence. A character with the handle animal skill can teach the animal more tricks up to its maximum. The only animals that can have more than the normal maximum of tricks are animal companions. I totally admit that the wording on animals in the LGCS is not clear at all. :)
w00tness 02-03-06, 09:19 AM	Hold person! OMGWTFBBQ! And it's even a second level cleric spell! Imagine a *single* casting wrecking an entire combat! </sarcasm> And unluck does less then that. Of course, it works on *everything*, which is the nice touch. But it essentially is a 50% usefull spell. Compare it especially to, say confusion which is a 4th level spell and has a 50% chance of ruining an *entire* action (instead of making rolls less effective) So it's to be expected that it does less then that, right? Unluck. Sounds cool, but I wonder how it stacks up. looking at the dicerolls, it skewers your dice as such: die chance 1 0,0975 2 0,0925 3 0,0875 4 0,0825 5 0,0775 6 0,0725 7 0,0675 8 0,0625 9 0,0575 10 0,0525 11 0,0475 12 0,0425 13 0,0375 14 0,0325 15 0,0275 16 0,0225 17 0,0175 18 0,0125 19 0,0075 20 0,0025 and has an avg of 7,125 So one *could* hold that it 'only' gives a -3 on all rolls. Wondering if it's true for higher numbers? Assume you need to roll a 17+ (i.e. 20% chance of success) the chance now becomes 20% of 20% = 5%, or having to roll a 20, so it's an -3 to the roll, exactly Compare to, say, Doom which gives a -2 to attack, saves, and bestow curse (4th level wiz / 3rd lvl cleric) which gives a -4 to skill checks, attack rolls, saves and ability checks. Of course, bestow curse also works on damage rolls, but the effect on those is even smaller then on a d20 roll (which is as random as it gets) So I personally think it's quite in the right ballpark, just looking at the numbers. Regards, Koos
MaxDog 02-03-06, 09:44 AM	The section on tricks is only slightly clearer than in earlier LGCSs (mainly with respect to riding dogs and trip). I still read it as implying, even more than in earlier updates, that domestic animals can be purchased with 4 tricks per point of Int, and that they can be taught more later via the Handle Animal skill. I agree that the new version is slighly more clear than the 4.2 version with respect to dogs and trip. However, I don't agree with your interpretation of how many tricks Domesticated Animals come with or can learn. Hence my request that this section be reworded. PHB p. 74: "An animal with an Intelligence score of 1 ... can learn a maximum of three tricks while an animal with an intelligence score of 2...can learn a maximum of six." If the LGCS is going to change a core rule, then it should be stated more clearly and leave no doubt. [/QUOTE] First, consider the word "extra", implying "more than normal": "When you buy an animal, you may pick an extra trick for each point of Intelligence the animal has. You must pick the tricks from page 74 of the PHB under Handle Animal. For the riding dog, you may either pick two extra tricks or use these two trick slots to make the dog trained to use a trip attack (as specified in the riding dog entry in the Monster Manual v.3.5). Animals gained that start play with more than the standard training must be supported with campaign or regional documentation." It specifies "extra trick", not "extra trick slot"; again, I don't think it is reasonable to assume that this reference overides the core rule that animals can learn a maximum of one trick per point of INT. The "extra" refers to tricks the animal knows beyond the attack trick, assuming its not a donkey or mule. Note that this also seems to imply that a riding dog can only be trained to use a trip attack at the time of purchase. Thus, an animal can be purchased knowing 4 tricks per point of Int (one extra). An Int 2 riding dog can start with normal max plus 2 extra tricks (thus 8), or with the normal max plus be trained to use a trip attack like a wolf (no longer says the confusing "trained for war"). Any other extra starting tricks require "campaign or regional documentation" (but the LGCS is campaign documentation for the extra tricks mentioned in the quote). Your interpretation requires the unstated assumption that the animal comes with its full compliment of tricks. The LGCS states this is true for Animal Companions (pg. 45) but it does not explicitly say this for Domesticated Animals. You interpretation also arrives at the conclusion that Domesticated animals can be purchased knowing more tricks (8) than a Druid's initial animal companion (6). That the LGCS still says you can use the Handle Animal skill to train an animal beyond the normal max of 3 tricks per point of Int (or the extra with a purchased animal, or the bonus skills of an animal companion) follows from: "Domesticated Animals: Most animals you can buy and adventure with are trained to some extent. These animals include those listed on Table 7-8 of the Player's Handbook v.3.5. The Handle Animal skill can be used to further train these animals." and "Characters with the Handle Animal skill can train their animals further." No. Domesticated Animals come knowing either two or three tricks, depending on it's INT score -- Attack is usually one of those tricks, the others are left to the discretion of the buyer. The animal is capable of learning a maximum of either four or six tricks. The owner may use Handle Animal to teach the animal those tricks. I have commented on this every update, but have not so much as seen a single comment by a Circle member on the issue, so I can only assume that my interpretation is correct. Absense of evidence is not evidence of absense. I think you are reading entirely too much into the word "extra". I think it is a poor choice, leading to false interpretations. If my interpretation is indeed correct, I would suggust wording the sentence: "When you buy an animal, it knows additional tricks beyond the basic Attack trick. You may select an additional trick for every point of Intelligence the animal has." To the final paragraph I would suggest a sentence: "Per the phb, the animal may not learn more then three tricks per point of Intelligence." If Tom's interpretation is correct, I suggest a statement explicitly saying that animals can learn more tricks than are allowed by the PHB. LEHaskell
chrispedersen 02-03-06, 09:50 AM	Mule (int 2) 1: Attack 2: 3 4 5 6 Riding Dog (Int 2) 1: Attack 2&3: Trip 4 5 6
CSHunt68 02-03-06, 10:39 AM	Yes, w00tness has it right. It gives just over a -3, effectively. The mean d20 roll for an affected creature becomes 7.175 (as opposed to 10.5). The median is between six and seven, which means that half of all rolls will become 6 or less (as opposed to 10 or less). This spell ain't breakin' _anything_ any more than any other spell. Regards, Sean Hunt
The_Voice_Of_Reason 02-03-06, 11:20 AM	Yes, w00tness has it right. It gives just over a -3, effectively. The mean d20 roll for an affected creature becomes 7.175 (as opposed to 10.5). The median is between six and seven, which means that half of all rolls will become 6 or less (as opposed to 10 or less). This spell ain't breakin' _anything_ any more than any other spell. While I generally agree that it's not by any strech of the imagination a broken spell. Ya'll need to also consider that the size of the skew is greatest at 20 and 1 on Wootness's curve Natural 20's and Natural 1's have non-scalar effects in the d20 system... that is to say they cause success or failure regardless target number and thus can not be rationalized to an effective flat penalty to the roll. This has a bigger effect than than one might think. I have found that the discrepancy between DC's vs. save bonuses, and AC's vs. attack bonuses is usually very high (especially at the higher levels). Consequently, the PC's or the NPCs find themselves in the situation of only being able succeed on a nat-20, or only fail on a nat-1 very often, and consequently Unluck has a somewhat larger effect than one might initially expect. Still, the comparison with Tasha's is IMO the best proof of balance. Tasha's is really the lowest-level save-or-die spell... just one save, if you fail, your basically out of the combat, (Not being "helpless" is trivial if all your friends have been killed while you laughed). It is a second level spell, can target anything (albeit often with penalties). Unluck: Higher level spell, but does less.
CSHunt68 02-03-06, 11:33 AM	The Spell doesn't even double the chances of a natural one - this half of the equation you've laid out just isn't affected very much. In fact, the effect of the spell is greatest at the high end, not the low one, and it's not even close. (The chances of rolling a "1" are almost doubled, while the chances of rolling a "15" are just about halved - everything above 15 becomes increasingly skewed.) The effective elimination of the possibility of rolling a 20 is probably the single most important effect of the spell. The spell basically eliminates the chance to auto-succeed on a save, or to auto-hit and threaten a crit. If you're fighting something that needs to get lucky to hit or save, it's much more effective. Well, I guess that's why the spell is called "unluck". ;) It gives a Will Save and affects a single target. It's a nice spell. It's not overpowered.
solbergb 02-03-06, 04:26 PM	The DCs are reduced by 4, not 5, and in my case, the primary target cops a DC 24 saving throw, and 12 minions take DC 20... it's not pretty at all. Even a single casting of the spell (not chained) can basically break the combat; and for goodness' sake; it's a third level spell. And lets look at some other will save stoppers out there. glitterdust (blind for whole combat, sculpt to get everyone) confusion (messed up for whole combat, already "pre-chained") charm monster (level 4, makes the monster your friend. Only significantly harder to chain if you do it with the rod, rather than the feat dominate person/hold monster (level 5, ends the combat) Given the existance of "confusion" which is both more powerful than unluck and pre-chained, what is the big deal here? ok, you can make constructs and undead unlucky. BFD. command undead is level 2 and far more effective on the latter, constructs are pretty much neutered by grease and glitterdust. This isn't quill blast. It isn't spikes+brambles stacking. It isn't disjunction. It isn't illusory pit. It doesn't need banning.
Swiftbrook 02-03-06, 04:39 PM	Animals do require armor proficiency to avoid the penalties of barding (see the description of the Animal type in the MM). Only animals that are trained for war are proficient with armor. Thus to the new rules only warhorses are proficient with armor, as riding dogs no longer can be bought trained for war, but only with the ability to trip. If it will be allowed to train animals for war (even only through additional campaign documentation), it would be nice to know what a character must do as I haven't found any rules about it. What reference in the Monster Manual are you refering to? (page number please). As this is unclear and I don't want to have another need for campaign documentation for my animals, I would like to be able to respond to this in an intelligent fasion. Thanks. -Swiftbrook
Mad Monkey 02-03-06, 05:08 PM	It is in the glossary, page 305. Or in the SRD. Animal Type: An animal is a living, nonhuman creature, usually a vertebrate with no magical abilities and no innate capacity for language or culture. Features: An animal has the following features (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry). —d8 Hit Dice. —Base attack bonus equal to 3/4 total Hit Dice (as cleric). —Good Fortitude and Reflex saves (certain animals have different good saves). —Skill points equal to (2 + Int modifier, minimum 1) per Hit Die, with quadruple skill points for the first Hit Die. Traits: An animal possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry). —Intelligence score of 1 or 2 (no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal). —Low-light vision. —Alignment: Always neutral. —Treasure: None. —Proficient with its natural weapons only. A noncombative herbivore uses its natural weapons as a secondary attack. Such attacks are made with a –5 penalty on the creature’s attack rolls, and the animal receives only 1/2 its Strength modifier as a damage adjustment. —Proficient with no armor unless trained for war. —Animals eat, sleep, and breathe.
RedKnightofKet 02-04-06, 12:03 AM	This is a response to the comment about "trained for war". Find the reference to training for war. Can't find it? You know why? It doesn't exist! I have tried to get answer out of WOTC on this, but I have been ignored. And the LGCS makes no reference to trained for war, either. My interpretation is that animals that are listed in the PHB as references for barding (horses, riding dogs, mules, etc) are trained for war provided they have the right tricks for combat. Any other animals would require the armor proficiency feat. The Red Knight of Ket
solbergb 02-05-06, 02:06 AM	The DCs are reduced by 4, not 5, and in my case, the primary target cops a DC 24 saving throw, and 12 minions take DC 20... it's not pretty at all. Even a single casting of the spell (not chained) can basically break the combat; and for goodness' sake; it's a third level spell. Ok, I just read this again, and realized what a straw man it is. You have a character with a 32 intelligence or charisma, and you are thus claiming that a chained unluck is overpowered. Or you are 28 intelligence with greater spell focus divination (not a very common choice). Hint...it isn't the spell. It's you that gets saves so high, and you must be at or near retirement to have an attribute that high, or have both very high starting attributes (20 int grey elves pay a high price in other atributes) AND feats invested. Or you are talking about 1/day stuff with spinning fate perhaps. Here's the normal range for unluck, given a 16 attribute caster, with +2, +4 and +6 items bought/crafted at the usual times. L5-7: attribute 17 or 17+2, DC 16 or 17, 12 if chained somehow L8-9: attribute 18+2, dc18 or 14 if chained somehow L10: attributre 18+4, dc19 or 15 if chained somehow L12: attribute 19+6, dc20, 16 if chained L14: attribute 19+7(inherent from some source), dc21. 17 if chained L16: attribute 20+8(again, more inherent), dc22/18 if chained. These are not what you'd call really high saves for the APL, especially vs the chained stuff. Instead of messing with Unluck, you could just land a real stopper and kill or completely incapacitate them, whith a higher chance of succeeding.
copper_wyrmling 02-07-06, 02:33 AM	Hint...it isn't the spell. It's you that gets saves so high, and you must be at or near retirement to have an attribute that high, or have both very high starting attributes (20 int grey elves pay a high price in other atributes) AND feats invested. Or you are talking about 1/day stuff with spinning fate perhaps. I know the character: he's a L12 grey elf diviner / divine oracle / loremaster with Spell Focus (Divination), starting Int 20 and a (crafted) +6 Headband of Intellect (he took the Spell Focus to qualify for Archmage) - so total Int 29. I suspect he's using the old save DCs for Unluck (based on it being a L4 spell), so the save DCs would be one lower for the SC version. So... not that close to retirement, and while he has an unusual feat choice, he's using it to qualify for a PrC. His save DCs are what you would expect from a high-level grey elf wizard - he hasn't gotten anything odd like inherent bonuses to Int. My biggest problem with Unluck is that it slows down combats when the GM has to roll all the dice twice. I didn't think it was unbalanced at L4 (compared to Confusion and Phantasmal Killer), and even as a L3 spell I think it's okay balance-wise (compared to Suggestion, for example), but it's a bit of a pain as a GM. Of course, there is the issue of spell school - as I understand it, Divination is supposed to be a less powerful school than the others, that's why a specialist diviner only gives up one other school. For that reason I think Unluck was better at L4, but it's still nowhere near the top of my list of problematic spells. Chaining Unluck is a nice trick, but a Lesser Rod of Chain Spell costs 27000gp and requires access (although I know that Maesto has just gotten metaregional access to one). Even at APL 12+, that's not pocket change. (For the record, I respect Jolyon for calling for the restriction of a spell that his character can use to great effect. That said, given what Maesto did with Confusion, Anticipate Teleportation and Illusory Pit in the last game we played, he really doesn't need any more help ;) )
TheMagus 02-07-06, 01:16 PM	This is a response to the comment about "trained for war". Find the reference to training for war. Can't find it? You know why? It doesn't exist! I have tried to get answer out of WOTC on this, but I have been ignored. And the LGCS makes no reference to trained for war, either. My interpretation is that animals that are listed in the PHB as references for barding (horses, riding dogs, mules, etc) are trained for war provided they have the right tricks for combat. Any other animals would require the armor proficiency feat. I always assumed that an animal was "trained for war", if it was trained to go into combat. Riding Dogs and Warhorses are already trained for this purpose therefore they can be given barding. See the PHB pg 75, section on Combat Riding under handle animal. Note that this also supports Tom's argument about the trip attack tricks being extra tricks since Riding Dogs and Warhorses start knowing 6 tricks just by the PHB rules. By the way, could we make animal training possible after metaregionals? The only character I have who uses it has never played in his home region, which means I cannot change the tricks for my dogs. For that matter, why does it have to be in your home region? Everything you need for training animals can be carried with you. Ever hear of the travelling circus?
chitzk0i 02-07-06, 04:54 PM	Is there any way to train a camel so that its bite is no longer considered a secondary attack? What tricks would I have to teach a heavy horse for its hooves to not be considered secondary?
solbergb 02-07-06, 09:45 PM	I know the character: he's a L12 grey elf diviner / divine oracle / loremaster with Spell Focus (Divination), starting Int 20 and a (crafted) +6 Headband of Intellect (he took the Spell Focus to qualify for Archmage) - so total Int 29. I suspect he's using the old save DCs for Unluck (based on it being a L4 spell), so the save DCs would be one lower for the SC version. So... not that close to retirement, and while he has an unusual feat choice, he's using it to qualify for a PrC. His save DCs are what you would expect from a high-level grey elf wizard - he hasn't gotten anything odd like inherent bonuses to Int. My biggest problem with Unluck is that it slows down combats when the GM has to roll all the dice twice. I didn't think it was unbalanced at L4 (compared to Confusion and Phantasmal Killer), and even as a L3 spell I think it's okay balance-wise (compared to Suggestion, for example), but it's a bit of a pain as a GM. Slow down combats? If we banned every spell like that we would have to eliminate most of the battlefield control spells and confusion. The DM can roll two dice as easily as one. It isn't as hard as looking up the damn confusion table :) As for the L12 grey elf, that's my point. He spent 16 points on his primary casting attribute, instead of the more usual 10, and also took a race that takes a con hit to boost it further. He's paid a price right there. Add that to feat spent and you're a seriously atypical character. His save DC's on the chained spell are as high as a typical L12 caster on the UNCHAINED spell. I could point out that his Confusion DC's are 5 points higher than his chained unlucks, and question why he's raising a stink about it. Heck *slow* is harder on enemies than unluck is, and it's a 3rd level spell, pre-"chained". Or to put it another way....my wife's L4 barbarian, with a mw weapon hitting as well as a typical fighter (starting 16 str, mw or +1 wpn) can dish out an average of 24.5 points of damage with her greataxe - enough to kill a APL4 BBEG in two swats or a minion in one swat. I do not use this as an argument that greataxes are broken and should be banned...because it is her attributes, feats and class abilities providing the edge over a normal character...not the axe. (she does an average of 21.5 damage with a random club found on the side of the road...) Divination less powerful? (true strike, critical strike, arrow mind, guided shot, assay resistance...*shyeah right*. Not to mention the actual hugely useful "notice things" spells like see invisible, arcane sight, analyze dewomer. As for saves...scrying and detect thoughts are gamebreakers, and all about the saving throw)