Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Sproik 01-10-04, 08:59 AM	Oren’s Arcane Ban Enchantment [Mind-Affecting] Level: Arcane 7th Components: V,S, F Casting Time: 1 action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft. / 2 levels) Target: One creature Duration: Instant Saving Throw: Will negates Spell Resistance: Yes The target creature loses all access to one specific spell for every 4 levels of the caster (maximum 5 spells). The spells are chosen by the caster, they must be arcane spells that appear on the casters class spell list. The victim is treated as though that spell does not appear on their class list at all. The victim can overcome this problem by refreshing themselves with 8 hours rest, whereupon the knowledge returns. Focus: A vial of water from the river lethe. ... Commentary?
Seeker95 01-10-04, 09:49 AM	I like the concept, but the mechanics are difficult. How would the caster know what spells the target has access to? Additionally, how does this scale with the level of the spell being "blocked"? This spell appears to see no distinction between blocking a 9th level spell and a 1st level spell. Suggested changes: 1. "Blocks" 1 spell level per level of the caster, max 20 spell levels. 2. The DM randomly rolls to see what spells are lost. This still leaves the application a little awkward. The DM would need a system of randomly determining spell level, then specific spell at that level, repeating the process until all "blocked spell levels" are done.
Kyuketsukiouji 01-10-04, 10:09 AM	This spell is fundamentally like Spell Immunity, but backwards. I'd leave the "you can deny a spell, but your target might not have it" aspect if the caster can choose spells. Otherwise, make the spells random. I'd also make the number of spells you can ban work like Spell Immunity does. Also, a greater and a lesser version (that can affect spells up to level 4 and 8 respectively), might be good.
Darklion 01-10-04, 10:15 AM	2. The DM randomly rolls to see what spells are lost.I like the spell levels concept that you suggested, Seeker, but I think this second part goes in the wrong direction. Let the player specify what spells he wants blocked. If the target doesn't have those spells, then those spell levels are effectively wasted. It's therefore up to the player to do some research and/or planning in order to maximize the use of the spell, but if he does, then he is rewarded by a far more effective spell. If he doesn't, and just rattles off the usual list of spells ("fireball, lightning bolt, magic missile") and the spellcaster uses different spells... well, then the player is screwed. Or perhaps have both modes to the spell. The player can choose to specify spells, with the corresponding waste of levels if the target doesn't have those spells, or can choose "random" mode.
Sproik 01-10-04, 10:31 AM	All good feedback. The intention was that the caster specifies the spells to be banned - if the target cannot actually cast them anyway, too bad for the caster. (Revised) Oren’s Arcane Ban Enchantment [Mind-Affecting] Level: Arcane 7th Components: V,S, F Casting Time: 1 action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft. / 2 levels) Target: One creature Duration: Instant Saving Throw: Will negates Spell Resistance: Yes The target creature loses all access to certain specific spells chosen by the caster, they must be arcane spells that appear on the casters class spell list. The caster can ban one spell level per caster level, up to a maximum of 20 spell levels. The victim is treated as though that spell does not appear on their class list at all. The victim can overcome this problem by refreshing themselves with 8 hours rest, whereupon the knowledge returns. Focus: A vial of water from the river lethe.
kami 01-10-04, 10:37 AM	I think it's a bit powerful in that neither Heal, Remove Curse, Dispel Magic, Antimagic Field or Mordekainens Disjunction can suppress the effects of the spell. I see the spell as creating a mental block, which denies access to certain spells - lifting the block should be possible (but difficult). Make it duration 10 min/level. This makes it more like a reverse Spell Immunity.
Kyuketsukiouji 01-10-04, 10:48 AM	*blinks* *swears at his oversight* Oh yeah! No duration: instant. Nuh uh! Duration: Instant bad! Very bad! There has to be a way to cancel this out in a fight beyond resting. Otherwise, it's way too powerful. If you want it uncancelable, I wouldn't allow you to take out more than *one* spell. As is stands, make the Duration: one day. It's occuring to me that this spell is a very, very good anti-cleric spell....which isn't necessarily a bad thing.
Sproik 01-10-04, 11:39 AM	It isn't a very good anti-cleric spell - it only functions on arcane spells! The anti-magic thing isn't particularly important (you cannot cast spells in anti-magic anyway), but dispelling the effect is a good point. (Revised Revised) Oren’s Arcane Ban Enchantment [Mind-Affecting] Level: Arcane 7th Components: V,S, F Casting Time: 1 action Range: Close (25 ft. + 5 ft. / 2 levels) Target: One creature Duration: One day Saving Throw: Will negates Spell Resistance: Yes The target creature loses all access to certain specific spells chosen by the caster, they must be arcane spells that appear on the casters class spell list. The caster can ban one spell level per caster level, up to a maximum of 20 spell levels. The victim is treated as though that spell does not appear on their class list at all. Focus: A vial of water from the river lethe.
Kyuketsukiouji 01-10-04, 11:55 AM	Missed that part about arcane spells. Then again, why only limit it to arcane magic anyways? A level 7 spell like that should also affect divine spells. Apart from that, I like it. I know a certain character of mine who might "independently develop" this little gem.