Post/Author/DateTime	Post
spike81101 07-24-06, 04:36 PM	I'm working on a 9th level single target damage spell and I was wondering what was a good rule of thumb for the damage to be. Considering that horrid wilting does d8 to those within an area, I was thinking that a 9th level single target should do at least that much. I also want it to be only destructive energy (so no energy resistance). Should it be 1d10/level? 1d8+1? 2d4? 2d6? It is hard for me to say since the only high level damage spell I can model it after is meteor swarm, which is terrible IMO. There may be other WotC products out there that give a better template for a spell like this, if you have soem info on this please post! :)
chucky 07-24-06, 04:54 PM	Doesnt the dmg have a chart for spell limitations for damage based on lvl? Something like 25D6? If you want more then that its up to the dm to decide or you might just make a epic spell that has more. But if you try to make a 9th lvl spell that does more damage then a epic spell your probably not going to be allowed to have it work. Remember you can spend the money and the time to research that spell but its only at the end is when the DM has to tell you it wont work.
Necromas 07-24-06, 05:02 PM	hm, well lets see what we could get with metamagic: Twinned Ord of Cold does 30d6 (105 average damage), no save, no SR for only a level 8 spell. So a 20d10 (average of 110 damage), no save, no SR spell would make sense for a 9th level spell. Sure it's a spell level higher, but saves you a metamagic feat. And it should be a level higher anyway for doing non-elemental damage. If you wanna make it stronger, you'd have to make spell resistance apply, or make it save based for a trade off.
Witch 07-24-06, 05:04 PM	Epic spells aren't that good without increasing the damage die a lot, and using mitigating factors. A ninth level single target damage spell? I'd cap it at about 50 to 60d6 damage with a save for half. Make it a ray attack. 3d6 per caster level or so. Might be a tad strong - but compare to the sixth level spell disintegrate, which has the addition of turning the enemy to dust.
spike81101 07-24-06, 05:08 PM	It just gives the maximum dice, not the type of dice. The max would be 25 dice, but what die type could you make it? (d4,6,8,10,12) There are also things that break this rule, such as disintegrate. I suppose you could also have it last for more than one round to make it on par with other 9th level spells.
Witch 07-24-06, 05:34 PM	That die cap is a guideline. Evocation spells break it frequently. 25d6 single target with a save would be crap ;) My opinion remains on 60d6. If you think that's to powerful, make it 60d4. 3 dies per caster level. Allow a reflex save to avoid, and require a ranged touch attack.
spike81101 07-24-06, 06:01 PM	Actually, I think I'll make a few different versions and see what everyone thinks. One will be a ray and the other will be target.
Lotus Crane 07-24-06, 06:12 PM	Well, does your spell require an attack roll to hit its target, and/or does it allow a saving throw for half damage, or negation? Does the spell allow SR? Does it have any secondary effects beyond damage, such as stunning an enemy? Does the spell require a costly material or XP component? Just how unpreventable is this "destructive energy" of yours? It's clearly not elemental energy, since that's what would be subject to energy resistance, but is it force damage? Negative energy damage? Damage "directly from divine power" like half the damage from a flame strike? But let's play around with some examples. It sounds like you want this damage to be as unavoidable as possible, so I'll start with low damage but impossible to avoid, and graduate to higher damage but increasingly easier to avoid. Ultimate Wrath (Version 1) Evocation [Force] Level: 9 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level) Target: One creature or object Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: No Your target is smote by pure, unstoppable, destructive energy, which deals 1d4 points of force damage per caster level (maximum 25d4). Effulgent epuration, spell turning, and similar effects which negate, absorb, or redirect spells (including even a researched epic version of spell immunity, for example), only have a 50% chance of working against ultimate wrath. Unlike many other force spells, ultimate wrath deals damage normally to objects, ignoring any hardness they may have. Ultimate Wrath (Version 2) Evocation [Force] Level: 9 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Effect: Orb of force Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: Yes You smite your foe with a opaque orb of pure destructive energy. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack with the orb to deal damage to a target. The orb deals 1d6 points of force damage per caster level (maximum 25d6). Unlike many other force spells, ultimate wrath deals damage normally to objects, ignoring any hardness they may have. Ultimate Wrath (Version 3) Evocation [Force] Level: 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Effect: Ray of force Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: Yes You smite your foe with a shimmering ray of pure destructive energy. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack with the ray to deal damage to a target. The ray deals 1d8 points of force damage per caster level (maximum 25d8). Unlike many other force spells, ultimate wrath deals damage normally to objects, ignoring any hardness they may have. Material Component: Precious gems worth a total of at least 2,500 gp. Ultimate Wrath (Version 4) Evocation [Force] Level: 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Touch Target: Creature or object touched Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Fortitude half Spell Resistance: Yes You smite your foe with a touch that infuses him with pure destructive energy. You must succeed on a touch attack to deal damage to a target. Your touch deals 1d10 points of force damage per caster level (maximum 25d10). Unlike many other force spells, ultimate wrath deals damage normally to objects, ignoring any hardness they may have. Material Component: Precious gems worth a total of at least 5,000 gp.
spike81101 07-24-06, 06:26 PM	The damage is destructive energy, just like disintegrate. Here are 3 versions, ray, targeted fort save, targeted reflex save. Let me know what one you feel works the best. Also let me know if I missed something. Flaying Ray (version 1) Transmutation Level: Sor/Wiz 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Effect: Ray Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: None Spell Resistance: Yes A ripple of wind leaves your fingertips striking at whatever target you wish. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit. Any creature struck by the ray takes 2d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 50d6). This ripple attempts to flay the flesh off of the target, exposing its skeleton underneath. When used against an object, the ray simply destroys as much as one 30- foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell grinds down only part of any very large object or structure targeted. Arcane Material Component: A bit of sandpaper Flay(version 2) Transmutation Level: Sor/Wiz 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Effect: One Creature Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Fortitude partial (object) Spell Resistance: Yes A ripple of wind leaves your fingertips striking at whatever target you wish. The targeted creature takes 3d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 60d6). A successful fortitude save reduces the damage by half. This ripple attempts to flay the flesh off of the target, exposing its skeleton underneath. When used against an object, the spell simply destroys as much as one 30- foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell grinds down only part of any very large object or structure targeted. Arcane Material Component: A bit of sandpaper Flaying Burst(version 3) Transmutation Level: Sor/Wiz 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Effect: One Creature Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Reflex Half Spell Resistance: Yes A ripple of wind leaves your fingertips striking at whatever target you wish. The targeted creature takes 3d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 60d6). This ripple attempts to flay the flesh off of the target, exposing its skeleton underneath. A successful reflex save reduces the damage by half. Arcane Material Component: A bit of sandpaper
Lotus Crane 07-24-06, 06:40 PM	It looks like we posted our ideas at almost the same time. Well, looking at yours, I'm a bit worried about those numbers, especially Flay (version 2) which doesn't mention allowing creatures to save against it for half (or like disintegrate, even less) damage. Any of your spells, under the right circumstances, look like they could one hit kill a balor or pit fiend, which doesn't seem right for a single direct-damage spell, even if it's 9th level... Anyway, my version 2 is most closely resembles a higher level version of polar ray: the same amount of damage, but of a superior energy type (force basically trumps everything), and longer range.
spike81101 07-24-06, 07:29 PM	I think you meant version 1 doesn't allow a save, which is typical of most ray spells. The damage may need to be cut down a little. I'm thinking either 2d4/level or 1d10/level.
Lotus Crane 07-24-06, 07:34 PM	I think you meant version 1 doesn't allow a save, which is typical of most ray spells. No, I meant version 2, since it was written less than clearly: Flay(version 2) Transmutation Level: Sor/Wiz 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Effect: One Creature Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Fortitude partial (object) Spell Resistance: Yes A ripple of wind leaves your fingertips striking at whatever target you wish. The targeted creature takes 3d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 60d6). A successful fortitude save reduces the damage by half. This ripple attempts to flay the flesh off of the target, exposing its skeleton underneath. When used against an object, the spell simply destroys as much as one 30- foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell grinds down only part of any very large object or structure targeted. A successful fortitude save reduces the damage by half. Arcane Material Component: A bit of sandpaper Underlined is where the line was, bold is where the line should be. The way you wrote it, it looked like creatures weren't allowed to save; only objects. The damage may need to be cut down a little. I'm thinking either 2d4/level or 1d10/level. Well, just keep in mind that it probably shouldn't be that much better than polar ray or meteor swarm, regardless of your opinions of them.
risner 07-24-06, 09:47 PM	I think 60d6 is a bit much. 25d6 is the guide, but 30d6 seems a reasonable amount to exceed.
Osedox 07-24-06, 10:01 PM	Should there really be a damage cap for 9th level spells? (at least at that level you dont really have to worry about it being meta-magicked to hell) When you look at all the amazing save or die spells out there it doesent seem that out of line to allow a 9th level spell to do 60d6 with a save for half? (210avg) I think making it untyped or rare typed is where you are going wrong (how many creatures even have force resistance?) That problem could even be solved by limiting the Die size (d4 for force, d6 for acid and sonic, d10 for electricity, and d12 for fire and cold, ect.) That way it doesent quite get out of hand.
spike81101 07-24-06, 11:07 PM	I'm basing my spells off of disintegrate and horrid wilting. I'm still on the fence about reducing the damage a bit, but I want to keep it no energy discriptor. There definitely should be some sort of cap, can you imagine twinning this thing? I think 50d6 is a good cap since wotc has a high cap limit generally at level 25. That is when it can get a little crazy. Here's some math, just to help evaluate: Disintegrate Average on successful save 5d6 = 17 min average (failed save) 22d6 = 22*3.5= 77 max average (failed save) 40d6 = 22*3.5= 140 horrid wilting min average 15d8 = 4.5*15= 67 damage (save for half) max average 25d8 = 4.5*25= 112 damage (save for half) Meteor Swarm (against a single target) average 26d6 = 3.5*26= 91 damage (no saving throw for target) this spell single target min average 34d6= 3.5*34= 119 damage to single target (save for half) max average 50d6= 3.5*50= 175 damage to single target (save for half) It is a touch high, but that isn't until later levels, at level 17 you're better off with the swarm I think, unless you're fighting something with a lot of resistances.
Lotus Crane 07-25-06, 12:16 AM	Should there really be a damage cap for 9th level spells? (at least at that level you dont really have to worry about it being meta-magicked to hell) Actually, Sudden Metamagic and Divine Metamagic can still cause problems at that level - in fact, they usually tend to cause even more problems than they do at lower levels. And even epic direct-damage spells tend to have dice caps, if they're a low enough casting DC that a character could actually cast them by himself within a round, as opposed to relying on a circle of followers to chant for an hour or more. When you look at all the amazing save or die spells out there it doesent seem that out of line to allow a 9th level spell to do 60d6 with a save for half? (210avg) Except to be balanced relative to the RAW framework, you need to compare a new 9th level direct-damage spell to existing 9th level direct-damage spells, not to 9th level save-or-die spells. I think making it untyped or rare typed is where you are going wrong (how many creatures even have force resistance?) That problem could even be solved by limiting the Die size (d4 for force, d6 for acid and sonic, d10 for electricity, and d12 for fire and cold, ect.) That way it doesent quite get out of hand. Well yes, based on the various orb spells in the Spell Compendium, or the various energy powers in the Expanded Psionics Handbook, generally speaking, force, sonic, or untyped damage means a spell should deal less, while being fire damage means a spell should deal more. But you can't forget other factors, such as whether a spell involves an attack roll, allows saving throws or SR, its range, and any costly material or XP components it may have. If you look at my four versions of ultimate wrath, for example, you go from a spell that deals a rather low 1d4/level but can never miss, be saved against, or stopped, to a spell that deals a hefty 1d10/level, but requires a melee touch, allows a save and SR, and has a costly material component. With that in mind, if spike81101's various flaying spells were shorter range, or had a costly component, they'd probably be closer to balanced.
spike81101 07-25-06, 12:29 AM	Hmm...looks maybe we were posting at the same time there, you didn't comment on my anaylsis. I'm thinking a costly component would be a good addition, as well as adding a touch attack, yet keeping the saving throw. Flay Transmutation Level: Sor/Wiz 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Effect: Ray Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Fortitude partial (object) Spell Resistance: Yes A ripple of wind leaves your fingertips striking at whatever target you wish. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit. Any creature struck by the ray takes 2d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 50d6). A successful fortitude save reduces the damage by half. This ripple attempts to flay the flesh off of the target, exposing its skeleton underneath. When used against an object, the spell simply destroys as much as one 30- foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell grinds down only part of any very large object or structure targeted. Arcane Material Component: A bit of sandpaper, embeded with black diamond dust worth 5,000gp
Witch 07-25-06, 05:33 AM	But you can't forget other factors, such as whether a spell involves an attack roll, allows saving throws or SR, its range, and any costly material or XP components it may have. That was kind of how I would allow the 60d6 thing. It would require all those things, and be energy damage. How do you feel about such a spell?
Osedox 07-25-06, 04:32 PM	Actually, Sudden Metamagic and Divine Metamagic can still cause problems at that level - in fact, they usually tend to cause even more problems than they do at lower levels. And even epic direct-damage spells tend to have dice caps, if they're a low enough casting DC that a character could actually cast them by himself within a round, as opposed to relying on a circle of followers to chant for an hour or more.Well as a Wiz/Sor spell, which is what I woud assume that we are talking about, Divine Metamagic isnt really an issue. You make a good point though that things could be done with Sudden Metamagic and Rods of Meta magic, but even that is only like 3/day if you have a rod. What I was refering to was some sort of cheese involving Arcane Thesis, Energy Substitution, Energy Admixture, Maximize, Empower x2, Twin Spell, and Fell Drain (like the ridiculous force missile mage on the Optimization boards.) Lets not even go into epic, because at that point power ballance levels go right out of the window. Except to be balanced relative to the RAW framework, you need to compare a new 9th level direct-damage spell to existing 9th level direct-damage spells, not to 9th level save-or-die spells.Direct Damage spells are notoriously underpowered, so I think that they should be compared to save or dies at 9th level so that they can become a viable option when you fight monsters with hundreds or thousands of Hp. Or perhaps its just that save or dies are grossly overpowered? But you can't forget other factors, such as whether a spell involves an attack roll, allows saving throws or SR, its range, and any costly material or XP components it may have. If you look at my four versions of ultimate wrath, for example, you go from a spell that deals a rather low 1d4/level but can never miss, be saved against, or stopped, to a spell that deals a hefty 1d10/level, but requires a melee touch, allows a save and SR, and has a costly material component. Bha, I hate costly material components, and automaticaly disregard any spell that includes one. Just a personal preferance, as i see many other ways for a spell to be ballanced by other means (unless it is the type of spell you cast once/year). Everything else you said in this paragraphI agree with.
Lotus Crane 07-25-06, 06:04 PM	Direct Damage spells are notoriously underpowered, so I think that they should be compared to save or dies at 9th level so that they can become a viable option when you fight monsters with hundreds or thousands of Hp. Or perhaps its just that save or dies are grossly overpowered? Even if that's true (and I'm not saying it isn't), to be fair, before any new direct-damage spell is made that can match save-or-idea, every existing direct-damage spell in the PHB and SC should be improved first. Just having a single powerful new direct-damage spell does nothing to solve the general problem of direct-damage vs save-or-die, all it does it introduce a new, and even more unfair problem (relative to the existing framework) of a single spell making all other 9th level direct-damage options obsolete. Bha, I hate costly material components, and automaticaly disregard any spell that includes one. You automatically disregard raise dead, restoration, resurrection, true resurrection, and true seeing? How do you ever survive?
tarkin 07-25-06, 07:09 PM	First, Horrid WIlting does 1d6/level, except to water elementals and other such creatures. As a general rule, it is a bad idea to think that "higher spell level = higher damage". Instead it is higher caster level = higher damage. This is inherent in the feat concept they made. In other words, because an empowered Cone of Cold can do the better than 22d6 does NOT mean it is OK to make a 7th level spell that does 22d6. In particular, the die caps were originally instituted for Save for 1/2 spells. That way, if you make your save, you should survive almost any single attack from a creature of your level. Higher spell level means the spell does things BESIDES more damage. Stunning, blinding, etc. etc. But there are ways to increase damage beyond the standard 1d6/level. For things that are Save for Partial, you can eak out a little more damage. For Save negates, a little more. Combine the two, and throw in mind affecting, and you have Phantasmal Killer - a 4th level spell that can kill you as you have a mind and fail both a will save and a fort save (partial). You could take that same idea and make this spell: ---------------------- Cutting Words Enchantment [Mind Affecting] [sonic] Level: Sor/Wiz 4 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Target: One living creature that understands the language you are speaking. Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Refex negates, then Will partial; see text Spell Resistance: Yes Your words themselves form into sharp sonic blades and cut into a target creature. The target first gets a Reflex Save to avoid them. If that save fails, the words cut into the subject. How much damage depends on their Will. On a failed Will save, they are entranced by the words, which cut into their body freely, doing 1d10/caster level, cap of 20d6. Even if the Will save is successful, the subject takes 3d6 points of damage, as while they are not frozen in place, the words are real sonic weapons that are cutting into their body. Anyone immune to mind affecting effects automatically makes their will save, but might take the 3d6 if they don't make their Reflex. --------------------------- Now, this spell is very similar to Phantasmal Killer, if a tiny bit less powerfull (it can't kill REALLY powerfull creatures). It is a low level spell, only 4th, but it is fine that it does 1d10/level because of the saves and the mind affecting and the sonic.
Osedox 07-25-06, 07:36 PM	Even if that's true (and I'm not saying it isn't), to be fair, before any new direct-damage spell is made that can match save-or-idea, every existing direct-damage spell in the PHB and SC should be improved first. Just having a single powerful new direct-damage spell does nothing to solve the general problem of direct-damage vs save-or-die, all it does it introduce a new, and even more unfair problem (relative to the existing framework) of a single spell making all other 9th level direct-damage options obsolete.Too true, but my god what a task! First, Horrid WIlting does 1d6/level, except to water elementals and other such creatures. As a general rule, it is a bad idea to think that "higher spell level = higher damage". Instead it is higher caster level = higher damage. This is inherent in the feat concept they made. In other words, because an empowered Cone of Cold can do the better than 22d6 does NOT mean it is OK to make a 7th level spell that does 22d6.Good points as well, however, CL has a limited effect on all spells from the modest Burnng Hands, to the mighty Firestorm. Sure a first level Wizard casting a Polar Ray does 1d6 damage, but he CANT cast Polar ray. So you are right, but spell levels definatly do have some effect on damage potential as well. They scale together, and it is impossible to have one without the other. I agree with the bit about metamagic, often a spell of the same level as a meta-magicked version of a lower level spell are quite off in terms of power. Cutting Words Enchantment [Mind Affecting] [sonic] Level: Sor/Wiz 4 Components: V, S Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Target: One living creature that understands the language you are speaking. Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Refex negates, then Will partial; see text Spell Resistance: Yes Your words themselves form into sharp sonic blades and cut into a target creature. The target first gets a Reflex Save to avoid them. If that save fails, the words cut into the subject. How much damage depends on their Will. On a failed Will save, they are entranced by the words, which cut into their body freely, doing 1d10/caster level, cap of 20d6. Even if the Will save is successful, the subject takes 3d6 points of damage, as while they are not frozen in place, the words are real sonic weapons that are cutting into their body. Anyone immune to mind affecting effects automatically makes their will save, but might take the 3d6 if they don't make their Reflex.Cool Spell idea! Although I dont like how you tried to offset the large damage potential for the low level of the spell, by making it have an option for two saves. Is this supposed t be a direct damage version of Phantasmal Killer?
Bopple 07-25-06, 09:42 PM	Numerically, DD spells are not that great. But that doesn't reflect every aspect of truth. Damage stack, be it physical or magical, but save-or-die spell don't synergize with damage done by fighter.
spike81101 07-25-06, 10:14 PM	Numerically, DD spells are not that great. But that doesn't reflect every aspect of truth. Damage stack, be it physical or magical, but save-or-die spell don't synergize with damage done by fighter.Exactly! Sometimes you just want to burn the BBEG for as much damage as possible. At high levels, he's probably going to make his save, so a save or die isn't going to help you out that much. Now, lets get back to the topic at hand, is this spell balanced enough for DMs to let in? Flay Transmutation Level: Sor/Wiz 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels) Effect: Ray Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Fortitude partial (object) Spell Resistance: Yes A ripple of wind leaves your fingertips striking at whatever target you wish. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit. Any creature struck by the ray takes 2d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 40d6). A successful fortitude save reduces the damage by half. This ripple attempts to flay the flesh off of the target, exposing its skeleton underneath. When used against an object, the spell simply destroys as much as one 30- foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell grinds down only part of any very large object or structure targeted. Arcane Material Component: A bit of sandpaper. 40d6 save for half at 20th level seems workable, but is the fact that it isn't an energy type pushing it over the bounds of a 9th level spell? If you feel it is, what should it be reduced to? **edit** removed spell component and dropped the cap to 40d6
Lotus Crane 07-25-06, 10:22 PM	I would say it's pretty well balanced at the moment. If you drop the cap to just 40d6, you could probably remove the costly material component.
neilthrun 07-25-06, 10:30 PM	Regardless of the question of whether these spells are ballanced, who wants to roll 50d6? Perhaps you could implement a system of 5d6X10 damage instead. While using a multiplication doesn't have any precident I know of with spells, the ditherbomb from races of the dragon uses a mechanic of 1d6x1d6 or something like that.
Osedox 07-26-06, 12:57 AM	Regardless of the question of whether these spells are ballanced, who wants to roll 50d6? Gentlemen, enter the Dice Roller (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20040517a)
spike81101 07-26-06, 01:17 AM	Regardless of the question of whether these spells are ballanced, who wants to roll 50d6? Perhaps you could implement a system of 5d6X10 damage instead. While using a multiplication doesn't have any precident I know of with spells, the ditherbomb from races of the dragon uses a mechanic of 1d6x1d6 or something like that.We normally either do 1d6x50, or take average dice (I've got a nice chart), or take average on 40d6 and roll 10d6. I reduced the cap to 40d6, this will be a nice clutch damage spell. It is now basically a disintegrate, save for half instead of save for 5d6.
Tequila_Sunrise 07-26-06, 01:34 AM	Regardless of the question of whether these spells are ballanced, who wants to roll 50d6? Perhaps you could implement a system of 5d6X10 damage instead. While using a multiplication doesn't have any precident I know of with spells, the ditherbomb from races of the dragon uses a mechanic of 1d6x1d6 or something like that. Just roll a handful of them and assume the rest are average. A note to spell crafters: The damage cap table in the DMG assumes d6s and your standard '1d6/level' evocation spell. I.e., polar ray at 9th level. If your game style is to allow all sorts of whacked-out supplemental spells like the Orbs, then exceeding this limit is fine. I myself would only exceed these guidelines by taking a whole lot from a spell in return (save for no damage or costly component). At most I'd allow the cap to be raised to 35d6; 60d6 is utterly insane because that's what Enhance Spell is for. Under no circumstances would I allow a 2d6 or 3d6/level spell...but that's just my game style.
Lotus Crane 07-26-06, 02:03 AM	Under no circumstances would I allow a 2d6 or 3d6/level spell...but that's just my game style. Maybe not 3d6/level, but you do realize that disintegrate, one of the most core and iconic D&D spells, is 2d6/level, right? I reduced the cap to 40d6, this will be a nice clutch damage spell. It is now basically a disintegrate, save for half instead of save for 5d6. Actually, looking more carefully, if flay is really just a 9th level version of disintegrate, then it's silly to have the same damage cap and a shorter range, just because now you save for half rather than for 5d6. You can raise it back up to 50d6 (avg 175, not quite enough to one-hit a balor or pit fiend) and medium range if you like. Let's put them side by side for comparison. Disintegrate Transmutation Level: Destruction 7, Sor/Wiz 6 Components: V, S, M/DF Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Effect: Ray Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Fortitude partial (object) Spell Resistance: Yes A thin, green ray springs from your pointing finger. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit. Any creature struck by the ray takes 2d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 40d6). Any creature reduced to 0 or fewer hit points by this spell is entirely disintegrated, leaving behind only a trace of fine dust. A disintegrated creature’s equipment is unaffected. When used against an object, the ray simply disintegrates as much as one 10- foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell disintegrates only part of any very large object or structure targeted. The ray affects even objects constructed entirely of force, such as forceful hand or a wall of force, but not magical effects such as a globe of invulnerability or an antimagic field. A creature or object that makes a successful Fortitude save is partially affected, taking only 5d6 points of damage. If this damage reduces the creature or object to 0 or fewer hit points, it is entirely disintegrated. Only the first creature or object struck can be affected; that is, the ray affects only one target per casting. Arcane Material Component: A lodestone and a pinch of dust. Flay Transmutation Level: Sor/Wiz 9 Components: V, S, M Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./level) Effect: Ray Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: Fortitude partial (object) Spell Resistance: Yes A ripple of wind leaves your fingertips striking at whatever target you wish. You must make a successful ranged touch attack to hit. Any creature struck by the ray takes 2d6 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 50d6). A successful fortitude save reduces the damage by half. This ripple attempts to flay the flesh off of the target, exposing its skeleton underneath. When used against an object, the spell simply destroys as much as one 30- foot cube of nonliving matter. Thus, the spell grinds down only part of any very large object or structure targeted. Arcane Material Component: A bit of sandpaper. Yeah, 6th vs 9th? I think that's a safe upgrade.
DM Zoc 07-26-06, 02:07 AM	Personally, I'd make it a ray (ranged touch, no save) that does 10 per caster level, up to a max caster level of 25. Simple, and it avoids rolling too many dice.
tarkin 07-26-06, 12:32 PM	Cool Spell idea! Although I dont like how you tried to offset the large damage potential for the low level of the spell, by making it have an option for two saves. Is this supposed t be a direct damage version of Phantasmal Killer? Yes, that is exactly what it is.
Osedox 07-26-06, 01:27 PM	Oh, well I hate that spell too, no offence. I just see there as being plenty more options for a save of die at those levels to have to resort to a spell which allows two saves to resist.
risner 07-26-06, 02:25 PM	From the people that support 40d6 save for half or 50d6/60d6 save for half, can anyone explain to me why this 50d6 save for half spell wouldn't be the 1st pick for every spellcaster in existance? If the spell is on a "must absolutely have" for the 9th level slot, isn't that the definition of an overpowered spell? With disentigrate, they doubled the max (20d6 to 40d6) and halved the min (10d6 to 5d6) plus used Fort (usually the highest save for monsters).
Lotus Crane 07-26-06, 02:37 PM	From the people that support 40d6 save for half or 50d6/60d6 save for half, can anyone explain to me why this 50d6 save for half spell wouldn't be the 1st pick for every spellcaster in existance? Because you'd have to pick it over various save-or-die spells, effulgent epuration, time stop, and wish. Also, you'd have to have a caster level of 25 to actually get the full 50d6 damage, and most wizards could easily be casting epic spells before that point. Epic spells that could easily deal 50d6 damage without a save allowed. If the spell is on a "must absolutely have" for the 9th level slot, isn't that the definition of an overpowered spell? Meteor swarm is still better for groups, and sphere of ultimate destruction can potentially deal more damage to a single target over the course of several rounds. With disentigrate, they doubled the max (20d6 to 40d6) and halved the min (10d6 to 5d6) plus used Fort (usually the highest save for monsters). Disintegrate is 6th level. Do you really think it's not okay for a 9th level version to have a cap that's 10d6 higher, and save for half instead of 5d6? Using the same or lower level spell slot, an empowered, maximized, twinned, or split ray disintegrate could still potentially deal more damage than flay.
spike81101 07-26-06, 05:30 PM	There is definite lack of 9th level damage spells, let alone single target spells. This probably accounts for some of the stunned people at the damage on this spell. I wouldn't call this spell a "must have" either. If you're limited to 4 spells, and you have to choose from shapechange, gate, timestop, disjunction, astral projection and wish, I don't see this spell as a "must" when compared to those.
DM Zoc 07-26-06, 05:39 PM	If I recall my outside sources correctly, I seem to recall a spell that did 20d6 per round in an area effect for a number of rounds equal to your caster level. I think it was one of Monte Cook's.
spike81101 07-26-06, 05:53 PM	Crushing fist of spite does 20d6/round to a single target...ouch. That is from BoVD.
risner 07-26-06, 08:52 PM	Do you really think it's not okay for a 9th level version to have a cap that's 10d6 higher, and save for half instead of 5d6? In a word, yes.
solbergb 07-26-06, 10:08 PM	For damage, always look at two benchmarks: metamagicked scorching ray. This nearly always comes in the top on raw damage on anything it can affect. Metamagicked "orb of XXX". This is pretty much top of the line for SR=no damage. If they get a save, disintegrate with metamagic is your touchstone. If your damage is significantly higher than these at level 17, it is probably too high. If it is a lot lower than these without some other huge compensating thing, nobody will use it. As acid arrow shows, going from short range and massive damage to long range and small damage/time+SR=no isn't a very common choice. These spells do have damage caps, so at higher levels the L9 spell will win out, as it should. Note that 17*3.5 = only 60 damage, so something like polar ray (d6/level) can't compete at all. for a level 9 spell, that means: maximized twinned scorching ray = 144 empowered, maximized orb of XXX =135 maximized disintegrate (fort save) = 204 (note that save/die stuff is in play from level 7 onward, so any saving through has to also be measured against "if I can make him fail a sae, why am I not just killing him outright?) as a side note...25d10 only does 137.5 damage. Which means at level 25 you're only matching a metamagicked orb. You really need something more on the order of 2d6 damage per level to match damage at 17 (119 points) and give a decent reward at 25 for the effort.
spike81101 07-26-06, 11:56 PM	In a word, yes.Porque?
risner 07-27-06, 11:59 AM	maximized twinned scorching ray = 144 empowered, maximized orb of XXX =135 maximized disintegrate (fort save) = 204 as a side note...25d10 only does 137.5 damage. Which means at level 25 you're only matching a metamagicked orb. You really need something more on the order of 2d6 damage per level to match damage at 17 (119 points) and give a decent reward at 25 for the effort. 1) fort save is the easiest save to make, so that Maximized Disintegrate is going to be 30 damage on most targets. Ignore the 204 damage value, as at 9th level it is almost certainly going to suceed 80% of the time (the mob will fail maybe 20 % of the time.) 2) The whole point of spell casting is to allow metamagic'd spells to roughly equal higher level spells. So there is no game mechanic based justification for any 9th level DD spell to deal more than a empowered maximized orb of XXX.
solbergb 07-27-06, 12:10 PM	Risner I agree with you to a point. At level 17, a level 9 direct damage spell should probably be slightly inferior to its metamagicked counterpart. But only SLIGHTLY inferior. Not HALF the power (which is what you get with d6, or even d8/level spells) At level 25, a level 9 direct damage spell should be superior to metamagicked spells, because the damage cap on the lower level spell should degrade its relative power. Consider an empowered fireball. At level 10, it blows the socks off of cone of cold (52 damage vs 35 damage). At level 15 though, they're about the same, and the higher level spell has somewhat larger area and higher save DC. Cone of cold is considered underpowered. One of the reasons why is because empowered fireballs exist. Doing only 66% of the damage at the outset and 100% at the cap is at the low end of what should be considered reasonable. So at a minimum a SR=yes direct damage spell at level 9 should do about 95 points of damage if SR=yes+energy or a bit less if SR=no+energy. Even if it is slightly superior to the orbs in some other way (range being typical). Also remember the orbs have a non-damage save or XXX effect, which can be traded for better range. At level 17, that's about a d10/level spell, at 25 it does 137. A d10/level spell is the "cone of cold" of 9th level spells. It won't be used very often because it is pretty much inferior to the metamagic versions through its entire life, especially if it doesn't have a range and/or secondary effect advantage. If all the spell does is damage, I honestly think you have to bump it to 2d6/level no save, range touch to make it a level 9 spell that anybody will actually use. That gets you 119 at the outset and 175 at level 25. This doesn't seem unreasonable at all for pre-epic and epic play.
spike81101 07-27-06, 12:41 PM	Relatively speaking, at 17th level meteor swarm will deal an average of 91 damage, with NO save. Flay will deal 119 damage, save for half. As you have already stated: 1) fort save is the easiest save to make so 119 quickly becomes 59 damage. A fair trade considering that it isn't energy damage.
chucky 07-27-06, 01:05 PM	You also have to remember you actually have to hit the target with disintegrate. Once you get to a certain level your BAB will not be keeing up with their ac. You also have to take into effect that its a beam attack. There are many ways to deflect or reflect that spell right back at the caster. Aka archmage. You pump the hell out of that spell to make it 60d6. All he has to do is counter and your the one eating the spell. So yes disintegrate is a uber spell vs things with a low fort save, are easy to hit and dont have any way to take no damage at all. There is a reason they went through the books and put a damage dice cap on most spells. And just because you have found one that doesnt have a cap doesnt mean there isnt one. You just probably havent looked at the eratta for it yet :)
Armoracia Rusticana 07-27-06, 04:16 PM	How about that one? Wrath of God (just kidding) Evocation Level: Clr 9, Destruction 9 (Yes, I know that Implosion occupies that slot) Components: V, S, DF Casting Time: 1 standard action Range: Medium (100 ft. + 10 ft./) Target: Single creature Duration: Instantaneous Saving Throw: none Spell Resistance: Yes You call for most destructive powers your deity granted you. Wrath of God deals 1d6 points of divine damage per caster level (thus that spell is not a subject of energy resistance or damage reduction), max 25d6. The spell usually utilizes name of a particular deity, Wrath of Kord being an example. That spell also ignores all non-epic versions of spell redirection and can only hit intended target. It has no effect upon followers of same deity who the caster worship. In certain occasions said deity can offer protection against that spell to other creatures - for a propper favor (can't imagine one, but DM can use that spot) or any way it desires. That spell negates most protection layers, as you can see. No save, SR, no need to make ranged touch attack, which tend to miss specific kinds of BBEGs or just depend on you profession (d20 roller) skill. Surely enough it is pretty good for cleric spell (1d6/CL), but that is has somewhat lesser limit than 3d6/CL (no offence) or 60d6 max (no offence again). That spell represents inavoidable damage caused by 9-th slot spell, simply put. It is not that easily abusable (save for divine/spontaneous metamagic), it cannot be used to destroy objects and such. That spell just does what OP asked it to - considerable damage to a single creature. Well... I am not good spell designer, though, and will apreciate comments and criticism.
solbergb 07-27-06, 04:36 PM	you've built two weaknesses into the above spell. 1. Target entry. Loss of Line of Sight defeats it (eg, obscuring mist) 2. Requires attack roll on a target entry - this is very rare. Usually it is either "effect-ray" with touch attack or "targeted" with no attack roll needed. Pick one. also as stated, 1d6/level 25d6 cap just isn't enough for a single target L9 spell.
spike81101 07-27-06, 04:45 PM	you've built two weaknesses into the above spell. 1. Target entry. Loss of Line of Sight defeats it (eg, obscuring mist) 2. Requires attack roll on a target entry - this is very rare. Usually it is either "effect-ray" with touch attack or "targeted" with no attack roll needed. Pick one. also as stated, 1d6/level 25d6 cap just isn't enough for a single target L9 spell.I don't know it doesn't look too bad actually. It is a divine spell so it should be a little less powerful than an arcane spell. I don't see where it needs a touch attack, but 25d6 no save is pretty decent, for a divine spell. But you've also got to look at harm and the fact that even on a save you're taking 75 damage. This is a bit underpowered, 1d8 would definitely be better. I was specifically looking to make an arcane spell, but I didn't specify.
Armoracia Rusticana 07-27-06, 05:18 PM	you've built two weaknesses into the above spell. 1. Target entry. Loss of Line of Sight defeats it (eg, obscuring mist) 2. Requires attack roll on a target entry - this is very rare. Usually it is either "effect-ray" with touch attack or "targeted" with no attack roll needed. Pick one. also as stated, 1d6/level 25d6 cap just isn't enough for a single target L9 spell. 1. Actually, everything can be defeated, even Pun-Pun. Ray spells are negated in that way as well, I believe. And others, too. 2. Well... it does not require a roll. Than, a 'targeted crearure' will do. 3. Anyway, thank you for discussing and suggestions. I don't know it doesn't look too bad actually. It is a divine spell so it should be a little less powerful than an arcane spell. I don't see where it needs a touch attack, but 25d6 no save is pretty decent, for a divine spell. But you've also got to look at harm and the fact that even on a save you're taking 75 damage. This is a bit underpowered, 1d8 would definitely be better. I was specifically looking to make an arcane spell, but I didn't specify. Thanks, Spike. Maybe 1d8/CL. Note that Harm requires a touch (can miss, supposes you are closing the enemy, which you may desire and may not) and SR applies, also. Many, many of CR at-least-17 monsters have SR, and BBEG actually has! anyway, rod of sudden metamagic (maximize, greater) and divine metamagic (twin) can bring something weird out of this spell. The kind of abuse I was afraid of when wrighting the spell down. 240 damage at level 20 is not something impossible, but that damage is too damn inevitable. But BBEG can survive, still. Pretend we are using 1d8/CL version. 240 damage become 320 suddenly. A little too much. as I call it. My opinion, though.
Osedox 07-27-06, 05:46 PM	1) fort save is the easiest save to make, so that Maximized Disintegrate is going to be 30 damage on most targets. Ignore the 204 damage value, as at 9th level it is almost certainly going to suceed 80% of the time (the mob will fail maybe 20 % of the time.)Your using Disintegrate Wrong, it is only for Mages, Undead, and tunneling.
Tequila_Sunrise 07-27-06, 10:10 PM	Also, you'd have to have a caster level of 25 to actually get the full 50d6 damage, and most wizards could easily be casting epic spells before that point. Epic spells that could easily deal 50d6 damage without a save allowed. Right...if being a wizard is that great with you as DM, I'm in every time! Meteor swarm is still better for groups, and sphere of ultimate destruction can potentially deal more damage to a single target over the course of several rounds. I keep seeing this word 'potentially'. I suppose that you could 'potentially' be right but I could also 'potentially' be the President of the United States. Disintegrate is 6th level. Do you really think it's not okay for a 9th level version to have a cap that's 10d6 higher, and save for half instead of 5d6? Using the same or lower level spell slot, an empowered, maximized, twinned, or split ray disintegrate could still potentially deal more damage than flay. Oh no, a metamagicked lower-level spell could 'potentially' do more damage! Well, duh. That's what metamagic feats are for; they provide a way for casters to do more damage but at the cost of save DC. If higher level spells did more raw damage, there would be no use for metamagic feats. In case anyone else missed the point made by a previous poster: higher level spells do not deal more raw damage, they only create new ways to do the same raw damage.
spike81101 07-30-06, 01:15 AM	Your using Disintegrate Wrong, it is only for Mages, Undead, and tunneling.This is worth repeating, you would almost never cast disintegrate on a melee oriented creature. If you don't like the spell, please give me some math on why not. If you compare this to meteor swarm, it is inferior.