Post/Author/DateTime	Post
elven warriorXX 04-05-06, 01:16 PM	This is a place to post spells that you have Fixed for your game or have banned. Please post the spell name, book its in, and change to the spell. Do not post the Entire spell unless it is in the SRD. Also post why you changed it and how it works in your games. For banned spells post the spell name, book, and why you banned it. This thread is for people wanting to post what they think about spells and for a list of spells that we think should be changed/banned. I for one don't like it that Polymorph is banned. FORMAT for changed spells Spell name (Book and page number) Change: Why?: FORMAT for Banned spells Spell name (book and page number Why?:
green_yawgmoth 04-05-06, 01:26 PM	I ban nothing in my games. If a player wants a broken spell, then I'll make sure their next enemy wizard has that spell prepared twice for every party member. I do use 3.0 haste, though, even though my game is slowly growing more 3.5 (Eberron sort of forces it). http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v91/yawgmoth/kittyjig.gif
tarkin 04-05-06, 01:33 PM	I don't change a lot, and ban nothing. No spell I have seen can't be tweaked to be reasonable (but players often refuse to cast it if it has become reasonable) My Major changes from the core books are: 1) Holy Word and similar spells A made Will Save will reduce Blinded and/or Paralzyed to: 1 round of a actual blindage and/or paralzyed plus victim is slowed for whatever time they would normally have been blinded or paralyzed. Otherwise, it is too much of an instant kill. ---------------- 2) creature summoning spells, including Gate: Also, I use the Sage's advice creatures and abilities that duplicate XP costing spells. They have to pay the xp cost, and paying an XP cost makes such a service above and beyond normal. --------- 3) Telekinesis: If you want to throw multiple weapons and get the damage based on the weapon, you must make multiple attacks, using iterative BAB. If you just want the weight based damage, you can throw it as one big throw using your best BAB. Note, I do not consider this a house rule, so much as a DM interpretaion.
elven warriorXX 04-05-06, 01:47 PM	I try not to ban anything to. I try to fix every spell. Keep them posting. here are some changes I made (both spells are in the Spells Compendium) Deadfall (SpC 59) change Druid 7 instead of druid level 8 Why?:Because of the Bombardment spells on the same level that is better. Call of (Kolyarut, Marut, Zelekhut) (SpC 42) Change: Sor/wiz will not get these spells. Why?: They are Lawful spells that summon a Lawful Outsider. More of a clerical spell then a sor/wiz.
Seeker95 04-05-06, 03:22 PM	Polymorph PHB Change: I make the caster *become* the creature. Naked and equipmentless. Use the stat block directly from the Monster Manual. Reason: Less micromanagement requirement on my part.
elven warriorXX 04-05-06, 03:55 PM	I have herd of that one before and it seems to work good. But you should have a MC of a part of the creature and they must have fought the creature.
True Cavalier 04-05-06, 04:23 PM	I don't think many spells are broken, and those that are, I change somehow. In fact I think quite a number of spells are -under-powered, and my group and I always houserule to better them slightly. I only ban... Any spell relating to Antimagic Reason: Antimagic is a silly concept imho, and it contradicts with the basic nature of magic in my campaign setting. There is no such thing as antimagic there. And something that occured to me now... Orb of <Energy Type> Spells, Spell Compendium Change: School: Evocation, Spell Resistance: Yes Reason: Fireball also "creates" fire, I don't see how an orb is different, as in "summoned", and therefore "nonmagical". And it's silly for something that is immune to magic, to be harmed by a "different kind of magic" though still quite directly.
Dragonsblood 04-05-06, 04:28 PM	Polymorph only into creatures your character has fought. Keen Edge (and the enhancement) stacks with the feat. Not spells, but caster house rules: Sorcerers and bards start with Eschew Materials, and can change out spells every level (like NWN). Clerics cannot cast spells with somatic components while holding a heavy shield and weapon, but can with a light shield and weapon.
Wonton2006 04-05-06, 05:11 PM	I'm pretty sure that clerics couldn't do that to begin with.
elven warriorXX 04-05-06, 06:57 PM	I don't think many spells are broken, and those that are, I change somehow. In fact I think quite a number of spells are -under-powered, and my group and I always houserule to better them slightly. I only ban... Any spell relating to Antimagic Reason: Antimagic is a silly concept imho, and it contradicts with the basic nature of magic in my campaign setting. There is no such thing as antimagic there. And something that occured to me now... Orb of <Energy Type> Spells, Spell Compendium Change: School: Evocation, Spell Resistance: Yes Reason: Fireball also "creates" fire, I don't see how an orb is different, as in "summoned", and therefore "nonmagical". And it's silly for something that is immune to magic, to be harmed by a "different kind of magic" though still quite directly. I agree with the Orbs. Sure some fire spells that fit the theme should be Conjuration but not the Orbs.
Dragonsblood 04-05-06, 08:02 PM	I'm pretty sure that clerics couldn't do that to begin with. Why not? The book says they can cast in heavy armor. The reason why arcane castors have a spell failure percentage is because it physically interfers with their somatic component. If heavy armor has 35-40% arcane failure, the 15% heavy shield shouldn't interfer more than heavy armor. Clerics shouldn't even be proficiant with heavy shields if they can't cast with them while in combat. From a mechanical point of view, clerics should be able to cast with a heavy shield and weapon. My DM's arguement is that the cleric needs a free hand to cast spells. Flavor wise it makes no sense to him. Where I disagree with this (flavor wise), is that the gauntlets of heavy armor don't exactly give you free hands either. The somatic component for clerics is supposed to be so simple, that a cleric only needs to put his hand up in the air (and if it's holding something that's fine) and pray to his god. He doesn't need to twirl his fingers and make delicate wrist movements like a wizard.
StruckingFuggle 04-05-06, 08:15 PM	Yeesh, True Cavalier ... that basically neuters the Orbs by getting rid of their two best features. o.o Why would you take it now?
Finlos 04-05-06, 08:32 PM	Requiring a spell resistance doesn't neuter them, it just brings them more in line with other 4th level spells. Switching schools from Conjuration to Evocation really isn't that big a concern to me. Here's my line of reasoning: A) The orb lines require a *touch attack*, which really isn't that hard for a pure arcane caster to accomplish. B) They also have no save on primary damage, just for secondary effect. With the orb spells the way they are now, there's little reason to use any other damaging spells on a single target. Finlos
elven warriorXX 04-05-06, 09:12 PM	Indeed. I can nail anything with my Sorcerer and his Orb of Fire and Orb of Acid. IF that does not work he has Fireball and Arc of Lightning.
smrtgmp 04-05-06, 09:33 PM	I added a save to holyword (and its cousins) I changed the HD cap on polymorph to 10 and added a 6th level version with a 15hd cap. I altered power word pain so that it does 1 point of damage per round and inflicts a -1 penalty on attacks, saves, and skill/ability checks, but gives a +1 to damage on melee attacks. I've never had a problem with the orbs. The damage just inst that impressive, and it certainly isnt enough to break my game. If you remove the ability to bypass SR, I cant imagine casting them. The flavor may be wonkey, but that doesnt make them unbalanced.
Seeker95 04-05-06, 11:57 PM	From a mechanical point of view, clerics should be able to cast with a heavy shield and weapon. My DM's arguement is that the cleric needs a free hand to cast spells.Your DM is not house ruling. He is following the rules.
elven warriorXX 04-06-06, 10:37 AM	I added a save to holyword (and its cousins) I changed the HD cap on polymorph to 10 and added a 6th level version with a 15hd cap. I altered power word pain so that it does 1 point of damage per round and inflicts a -1 penalty on attacks, saves, and skill/ability checks, but gives a +1 to damage on melee attacks. I've never had a problem with the orbs. The damage just inst that impressive, and it certainly isnt enough to break my game. If you remove the ability to bypass SR, I cant imagine casting them. The flavor may be wonkey, but that doesnt make them unbalanced. what gets me is that WOTC is making lots of Damaging spells in the Conjuration school. Do they think Evocation has enough spells or something? As for the Clerical thing I have never had to put down my shield to cast a spell. Were does it say this rule?
jaelis 04-06-06, 11:43 AM	As for the Clerical thing I have never had to put down my shield to cast a spell. Were does it say this rule? Under the description of heavy shields: Shield, Heavy, Wooden or Steel: You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A heavy shield is so heavy that you can’t use your shield hand for anything else. Always seemed pretty clear to me.
elven warriorXX 04-06-06, 11:55 AM	Under the description of heavy shields: Always seemed pretty clear to me. I know that but were does it say that the Cleric needs 1 hand free?
jaelis 04-06-06, 11:57 AM	In the magic description, the description of a somatic component says: Somatic (S): A somatic component is a measured and precise movement of the hand. You must have at least one hand free to provide a somatic component. No exceptions for divine casters.
Dragonsblood 04-06-06, 12:57 PM	That was written for arcane casters. Divine casters don't need precise hand movements. Otherwise they'd have a spell failure chance.
Dragonsblood 04-06-06, 12:58 PM	Under the description of heavy shields: Always seemed pretty clear to me. They can use the hand holding the weapon then.
elven warriorXX 04-06-06, 01:11 PM	In the magic description, the description of a somatic component says: No exceptions for divine casters. Oh! okay I will tell my DM that.
True Cavalier 04-06-06, 01:27 PM	Yeesh, True Cavalier ... that basically neuters the Orbs by getting rid of their two best features. o.o Why would you take it now? My PC wizard has the Bloodline of Fire feat and his Lesser Fire Orb does much more damage than his magic missile. As for the fourth level spell, I don't know, and I don't care. As you can see from the rest of my post, balance isn't an issue in our games :P
jaelis 04-06-06, 01:35 PM	That was written for arcane casters. Divine casters don't need precise hand movements. Otherwise they'd have a spell failure chance. They can use the hand holding the weapon then. For goodness sake... There are many places where the rules are unclear. This is not one of them. If you want to houserule that no cleric spell has a somatic component, that is fine.
Seeker95 04-06-06, 02:19 PM	Dragonsblood, I would love to have someone like you for a DM. All the tricks and advantages I have managed to learn from disruptive players would make me a veritable god in that game. However, having such a player in my game would result in his being expelled from the game, or learning that such a reading of the rules just doesn't fly.
smrtgmp 04-06-06, 06:25 PM	what gets me is that WOTC is making lots of Damaging spells in the Conjuration school. Do they think Evocation has enough spells or something?Dont get me wrong. I understand why people have a problem with them from a flavor perspective. But bad flavor does not make the spells broken.
Archtyrant Terevoth 04-06-06, 06:26 PM	The complete version of all my spell nerfs would likely take up an entire pageworth of posts. :)
elven warriorXX 04-06-06, 06:28 PM	Okay then just post the best ones :)
Lina_Inverse 04-06-06, 07:03 PM	The complete version of all my spell nerfs would likely take up an entire pageworth of posts. :) Its good to know you smack mages as much as psions. But i agree with this. But i rewrote the entire game so...
Dragonsblood 04-07-06, 12:10 AM	Dragonsblood, I would love to have you for a DM. All the tricks and advantages I have managed to learn from disruptive players would make me a veritable god in your game. However, having you as a player in my game would result in your being expelled from the game, or learning that your reading of the rules just doesn't fly. Is the personal attack really necessary? I mean it's bad enough that you seem to go out of your way to disagree with every post I make, even when you're blatantly wrong (empower spell anyone?).
elven warriorXX 04-07-06, 10:18 AM	okay People Time out. No more flame war. Back on subject :D
Freedom 04-07-06, 12:44 PM	Fireball also "creates" fire, I don't see how an orb is different, as in "summoned", and therefore "nonmagical". And it's silly for something that is immune to magic, to be harmed by a "different kind of magic" though still quite directly. Technically, being an evocation, Fireball does not create actual fire, but evokes the power of fire. A similar effect is achieved most of the time, but they are different.
elven warriorXX 04-07-06, 01:01 PM	yes Evocation is using the power of the Energy. Conjuration calls the real force of Fire to use. Here is some more changes Acid storm (Spell Compendium) Change: all hit must Fort save or be sickened for 1d4 rounds. Why: Because it is a 6th level spell that can deal only 15d6 damage at 15th level. Cone of Cold (SRD) Change:all in the Cone are Slowed for 1d4 rounds unless they make a Fort save. It also coats the ground with frost causing creatures to slip and fall prone unless they make a Reflex save. Why: Because it is a 5th level spell and is weaker then most spells.
redarius 04-07-06, 01:54 PM	These aren't so much specific spell nerfs as restricting access to spells. There's a chance in my game for anyone to find any spell in the PHB as random treasure, depending on the type of encounter. Also, they may be available for purchase, depending on the type of establishment they're looking in. Spells from alternate sources, (basically the Spell Compendium... but before it, the Complete books and other FR specific sourcebooks) are generally learned through research or quests. Occasionally a named or recurring NPC will also give access to spells associated with them. Bits and pieces of these spells may be found in the world, but they're considered a "higher" arcana or a deeper divine secret and that implies greater cost. Re: Divine spellcasters and using a weapon + heavy shield... I'd never read or interpreted the rules that way, but it seems that is correct. This should provide some.... frustrating moments for players in my campaign. One spell I've considered modifying to a higher level is Phantasmal Killer. It's 4th level, and it's "two saves or die". Bleh.
Archtyrant Terevoth 04-07-06, 02:11 PM	Okay then just post the best ones :) Dimension Door Change: lead blocks the spell, as thin as lead sheeting. Reason: This prevents scry/teleport attacks and allows relatively cheap defense of castles and dungeons versus teleportation magic, so adventurers can't easily traverse through the dungeon magically. Teleport/ Greater teleport Change: Can only go to specific keyed teleportation circles Reason: Same as dimension door, except this grants a useful plot device as well whereby they can learn the magical rune destination for a given teleportation circle and go there that way. Gate Change: travel spell only, no summoning, gate takes 1 round to actually open and is visible on both sides at this time. DUring which time it can be dispelled from either end. Reason:This allows for teleport style attacks but still gives the defender some time to prepare, at that level 1 round should be sufficient for them to rally defenses. Iron Body Change: Spell failure applies to divine as well as arcane casters. Reason:This spell is a huge buff and the spell failure chance is supposed to balance it out. Letting divines ignore that was letting them get away with something they shouldn't have. Wall of Force/Forcecage Change: Both of these are now visible to onlookers instead of being invisible force. Reason: It prevents any sort of arguments about what happens when someone runs into an invisible wall, and prevents enemies from having to waste an action or metagame to play against a forcewall. It's a lot easier when the wall is simply visible. Protection from Evil/Good/etc. Change: No longer grants any protection against charm and compulsion spells. Reason: A 1st level spell shouldn't be able to hose the entire school of enchantment. Rope Trick Change: Banned. Reason: This spell is nuts. Free safe resting with virtually no chance of detection. Greater Magic Weapon/ Magic vestment Change: Instead of replacing the enhancement bonus, this spell instead merely increases the existing enhancement bonus by 1. Reason: It prevents the spell from devaluing real magic weapons and armor.
elven warriorXX 04-07-06, 03:50 PM	I like your changes Archtyrant Terevoth. They balance it out more. Please post more :)
Archtyrant Terevoth 04-08-06, 01:39 PM	OK, here's some more. Mord's Disjunction Change: This spell has no effect against epic magic items, spells or artifacts. It autodispels normal magical spells as described. Against normal magical items, the creature gets one will save. If he fails then all the items he is carrying are suppressed for 1d6 minutes. Reason: This spell has a lot of problems. First, the item destruction is a straight up PC hoser that really screws up the wealth by level guidelines. To make matters worse, you roll for each item, meaning that you're going to have lots of rolls for high level PCs. You're looking at 20+ saves per PC hit. That's insane. As for artifact destruction, I see no point in allowing this spell to destroy artifacts. Artifacts are placed in the game specifically as plot devices that have to be deconstructed in a special way. Since the spell was written, this function was pretty much always seen as being too powerful. Which is why it had that weird "you lose all spellcasting and might as well roll up a new character" mechanic attached to it. Lame. Lets face it, if we put artifacts in our game, we don't want them getting destroyed in the first 5 minutes. You've got to take the One Ring to Mt.Doom, and it's really that simple. So no artifact destruction. Other Banned Spells Antimagic Field: Antimagic is just problematic as a whole, and I don't see any good reason why we should even deal with it. There are a great many edge cases dealing with it that the designers couldn't even successfully write a rules of the game article about antimagic fields. There's really not any instance where PCs *need* AMF anyway. Against most encounters, AMF is more of a hindrance, since monsters have better unmodified stats and rarely have magical equipment. Sure, there's a rare instance where AMF might be useful, but it raises too many problems to worry about it much. Astral Projection: This spell effectively makes you immune to dying and protects your equipment too. It takes away much of the risk of adventuring. I don't see any positive from having this spell in the game either. Shrink Item: I've never really seen a great use for this spell beyond breaking the game. It allows you to carry super heavy stuff out of the dungeon, like furniture and statues that you probably shouldn't. The DM constantly has to worry about turning dungeon dressing into loot. Further if you really want to abuse it, you can use it to drop/throw heavy objects at people to abusing the falling object rules. With bags of holding, I see no real need for a spell like this. Adventurers can already carry a lot, and a bag of holding is much less abusive than this spell. Time Stop: Extra actions aren't good for the game. They allow casters to "go nova" and beat things tougher than they should be able to. Not to mention extra actions slow down the game and gives the other PCs longer to wait inbetween their actions. Nobody wants to sit around and wait for another PC to take 4 consecutive actions while you still haven't acted yet.
elven warriorXX 04-10-06, 03:33 PM	I agree with Disjunction but I other ones are not needed. Well maybe Astral Projection does need a nerf.
True Cavalier 04-10-06, 05:40 PM	While I definetely see your reasoning, most of these changes just make magic less magic... Like Shrink Item. The best mages in the land can tear down castles, but cannot reduce an item in size? :P Strange. And I fail to see how ninth level spells can create balance issues since they are, in fact, the most powerful kind of magic that mortals are supposed to wield. Specifically for Time Stop, I allow the caster to do whatever he wishes (including as many coup-de-grace attacks as he can manage, or death spells, or whatever.)
elven warriorXX 04-10-06, 06:19 PM	Yes Time stop does not need a nerf. In the RAW it is like a mass Stun spell but is not as good as a Mass stun spell because you can attack creatures or cast spells that effect other creatures.