Post/Author/DateTime	Post
edsonaoki 09-14-04, 10:56 AM	The Cometfall spell (from CDH, Cleric 6/druid 6) does 2d6 damage/2 levels, limited by by the height of the ceiling when used indoors. However, when used outdoors, there is height limit. So, a 20th-level cleric would inflict 20d6 damage with a 6th-level spell, or maximize it for 120 damage. This is more damage than the average damage of a direct hit of a meteor swarm! Isn't a damage cap needed? (a good damage cap would be 75 ft. height limit - 14d6 damage)
Lina_Inverse 09-14-04, 10:59 AM	The Cometfall spell (from CDH, Cleric 6/druid 6) does 2d6 damage/2 levels, limited by by the height of the ceiling when used indoors. However, when used outdoors, there is height limit. So, a 20th-level cleric would inflict 20d6 damage with a 6th-level spell, or maximize it for 120 damage. This is more damage than the average damage of a direct hit of a meteor swarm! Isn't a damage cap needed? (such as 75 ft. height limit - 14d6 damage) no its just a DD,the only people who would use it are druids.clerics and wizards will stick with save or dies.
edsonaoki 09-14-04, 11:15 AM	Originally Posted by Lina_Inverse no its just a DD,the only people who would use it are druids.clerics and wizards will stick with save or dies. Even if you are fighting a dragon with +28 Fort. save, an undead or any foe protected by a death ward spell?
Lina_Inverse 09-14-04, 11:19 AM	Even if you are fighting a dragon with +28 Fort. save, an undead or any foe protected by a death ward spell? dragons?what the +4CR beasts of bossdom?maybe not them,but i prolly blew half my spells buffing anyways. undead are wusses,not a threat.
edsonaoki 09-14-04, 01:11 PM	Originally Posted by Lina_Inverse dragons?what the +4CR beasts of bossdom?maybe not them,but i prolly blew half my spells buffing anyways. undead are wusses,not a threat. I'm talking about normal campaigns, not ultra-power campaigns (I assume that's your case since you said undead are wusses). And the issue is not whether cometfall is better than other spells. The issue is why the DM Guide tells that divine spells should have damage caps lesser than arcane spells, and they throw out a DD spell with no damage cap at all.
Sphyre 09-14-04, 03:11 PM	The Cometfall spell (from CDH, Cleric 6/druid 6) does 2d6 damage/2 levels, limited by by the height of the ceiling when used indoors. However, when used outdoors, there is height limit. So, a 20th-level cleric would inflict 20d6 damage with a 6th-level spell, or maximize it for 120 damage. This is more damage than the average damage of a direct hit of a meteor swarm! Isn't a damage cap needed? (such as 75 ft. height limit - 14d6 damage) Isn't that enough of a cap? Druids are supposed to be more powerful outside than inside - and now they have a spell that shows it! and what's this about it doing more damage than meteorswarm? Meteor swarm can deal 32d6 damage to one target, no save and 24d6 to everyone in a 40 ft radius of that target - or you can spread out the hurt if you want. It has a staggered scaling, which makes it less useful at some levels, while just as useful at certain levels (like, why would you use it over flamestrike before 16th level, other than bypassing resistances and creating rubble?) I think it's an amazingly balanced spell, good enough to use, but not as good as arcane, which is what it should be.
Lina_Inverse 09-14-04, 04:53 PM	I'm talking about normal campaigns, not ultra-power campaigns (I assume that's your case since you said undead are wusses). undead are wusses,this aint 2E(where i ran and hid like a baby.).they have pathetic hp values,all the immunitys in the world dont matter if the fighters full attack slays you. And the issue is not whether cometfall is better than other spells. The issue is why the DM Guide tells that divine spells should have damage caps lesser than arcane spells, and they throw out a DD spell with no damage cap at all. druids have the best nukes,the dmg contridicts the phb here. it has a intresting damege cap xP the height of the ceiling! but anyways,its not a major balence issue,a wizard by this level has save or dies.the druid has baleful polymorph and slay living.
smrtgmp 09-14-04, 05:25 PM	Regardless of conditional weaknesses, it still vastly exceeds the damage cap for a divine spell of its level. I am of the opinion that WotC should stop releasing spells that violate the rules they publish. I would have no problem with this spell if it was a couple of levels higher, but I think its too powerful for the level at which it was placed.
edsonaoki 09-14-04, 05:31 PM	Originally Posted by Lina_Inverse undead are wusses,this aint 2E(where i ran and hid like a baby.).they have pathetic hp values,all the immunitys in the world dont matter if the fighters full attack slays you. I assume your DM doesn't know how to use undead, so I will disregard your comment. druids have the best nukes,the dmg contridicts the phb here. it has a intresting damege cap xP the height of the ceiling! Hardly. Druids learn most nuke spells one level after wizards. What about clerics? but anyways,its not a major balence issue,a wizard by this level has save or dies.the druid has baleful polymorph and slay living. so, arcane spellcasters should be able to learn healing spells, because all enemies are going to die immediately in the hands of the terrible save or die spells anyway? Originally Posted by Sphyre and what's this about it doing more damage than meteorswarm? Meteor swarm can deal 32d6 damage to one target, no save and 24d6 to everyone in a 40 ft radius of that target - or you can spread out the hurt if you want. Well, meteor swarm doesn't knock targets prone, neither creates a cloud of debris. But I didn't meant it was better than MS, my intention was to say there is no reason it for not having a damage cap, whereas all DD/Reflex half spells have. A caster with the proper "+1 caster level" items, feats and abilities can easilly do more than 20d6 damage, which is not possible with any other 6th-level spell. It has a staggered scaling, which makes it less useful at some levels, while just as useful at certain levels (like, why would you use it over flamestrike before 16th level, other than bypassing resistances and creating rubble?) A flame strike caps at 15th-level. I wouldn't complain about a fireball that deals 2d6/2 levels and doesn't have damage cap. I think it's an amazingly balanced spell, good enough to use, but not as good as arcane, which is what it should be. I don't think so. A wizard or sorcerer certainly would think Cometfall usable. When you get it isn't as good as chain lightning, but at highter levels, archmages and red wizards will quickly find a use for all these "+1 to caster level" stuff. At Epic levels, certainly this spell will superpass many others in usefulness (like already happens with other uncapped spells like Blasphemy and Holy Word)
Lina_Inverse 09-14-04, 05:38 PM	I assume your DM doesn't know how to use undead, so I will disregard your comment. how do YOU run.remember there int scores(most arent very high.)the problem with undead is the low hp,low enough a decent fighter can kill them in one round. Hardly. Druids learn most nuke spells one level after wizards. What about clerics? flame strike,is strictly better than wizard equivelents. so, arcane spellcasters should be able to learn healing spells, because all enemies are going to die immediately in the hands of the terrible save or die spells anyway? i think wizards should get healing either way! Well, meteor swarm doesn't knock targets prone, neither creates a cloud of debris. But I didn't meant it was better than MS, my intention was to say there is no reason it for not having a damage cap, whereas all DD/Reflex half spells have. A caster with the proper "+1 caster level" items, feats and abilities can easilly do more than 20d6 damage, which is not possible with any other 6th-level spell. i didnt say it isnt a REALLY good spell.actully im glad its capless,i also feel wizys should get a capless nuke or two for those epic levels. A flame strike caps at 15th-level. I wouldn't complain about a fireball that deals 2d6/2 levels and doesn't have damage cap. nor would i,i believe wizys should get some capless nukes. I don't think so. A wizard or sorcerer certainly would think Cometfall usable. When you get it isn't as good as chain lightning, but at highter levels, archmages and red wizards will quickly find a use for all these "+1 to caster level" stuff. At Epic levels, certainly this spell will superpass many others in usefulness (like already happens with other uncapped spells like Blasphemy and Holy Word) heh,which is why i agree with capless spells. no the only problem with this is it isnt cleric 9 instead of 6 xP
BW0222 09-14-04, 06:31 PM	At 20th-level, not many creatures couldn't take 20d6 damage - assuming that they didn't make their saving throw. I'm seeing 400hp dragons, 200hp giants, or a 150hp demon. Not many wouldn't save for half, have SR, etc. Flame strike does 15d6 (and it is only 4th), fire seeds can do about the same (6th). And of course baneful polymorph is a save or almost dead spell at 5th. And comet fall is also much less useful when not outside -- say a 30' ceiling.
smrtgmp 09-14-04, 08:06 PM	how do YOU run.remember there int scores(most arent very high.)the problem with undead is the low hp,low enough a decent fighter can kill them in one round.Unless of course you are fighting a pack of incorporeal, level draining udead who can pop out of walls to attack. A fighter cant attack a creature in a wall At 20th-level, not many creatures couldn't take 20d6 damage - assuming that they didn't make their saving throw. I'm seeing 400hp dragons, 200hp giants, or a 150hp demon. Not many wouldn't save for half, have SR, etc.Cometfall isnt subject to SR. And you wouldnt have it prepared if you were indoors. You dont cast dominate on an undead, do you? Of course you dont, but that doesnt make it any less powerful.
Sphyre 09-14-04, 08:07 PM	At 20th-level, not many creatures couldn't take 20d6 damage - assuming that they didn't make their saving throw. I'm seeing 400hp dragons, 200hp giants, or a 150hp demon. Not many wouldn't save for half, have SR, etc. Ah, the wonders of Conjuration (Creation) spells is that they offer no SR! Take too much away from the poor druids and they won't even have any spells worth casting anymore. Fire Seeds is pretty much strictly better when properly prepared with energy resistance. Cast your energy resistance fire, walk upto your enemy and boom, you take nothing until 23rd caster level - while they take way more than cometfall. Biggest/easiest fix: You don't like it? Don't allow it in your game - it's not a core spell. It's complete divine. You don't see many people complaining about the BoED, because it's so rediculously broken that 95% of all DMs ban it! My 2 cents: It's a druid spell worth casting, but doesn't overshadow other 6th level spells to where I wouldn't choose others over it - that's balance imho.
deafbymetal 09-14-04, 10:09 PM	I like the spell, actually. Bear in mind that at 20th level, you also have access to four 9th level spells, so you could choose instead of Cometfall to cast Miracle (Divine Intervention), Implosion (ouch.), Storm of Vengeance (360' radius, look at what it does each round to an army!), or Summon Monster 9 (how do you pronounce Couatl?). At 17th level the damage would be 16d6 for Cometfall, or for the cost of 5000 xp you could ask your Deity to send everyone in that 10' square to the lowest level of Hell with banners reading "Asmodeus Sux" :eek: In all seriousness, I've seen worse spells as far as mechanics are involved. And in the campaigns I play in, for a Cleric to have access to a new spell like this, he would have to research it for 1 day per level, roll a check to see if he is granted the spell, and even if he makes his roll his deity/dm can always say nope. Of course, the 9th level spells get different saves and some are subject to SR.
smrtgmp 09-14-04, 10:34 PM	I like the spell, actually. Bear in mind that at 20th level, you also have access to four 9th level spells, so you could choose instead of Cometfall to cast Miracle (Divine Intervention), Implosion (ouch.), Storm of Vengeance (360' radius, look at what it does each round to an army!), or Summon Monster 9 (how do you pronounce Couatl?). That doesnt change the fact that cometfall is a 6th level spell that exceeds the damage cap. By a lot. At 17th level the damage would be 16d6 for Cometfall, or for the cost of 5000 xp you could ask your Deity to send everyone in that 10' square to the lowest level of Hell with banners reading "Asmodeus Sux" Which requires a 9th level spell. Whats your point? And in the campaigns I play in, for a Cleric to have access to a new spell like this, he would have to research it for 1 day per level, roll a check to see if he is granted the spell, and even if he makes his roll his deity/dm can always say nope. Thats a house rule. Its a good one, but its a house rule none the less.
Sphyre 09-14-04, 10:50 PM	Thats a house rule. Its a good one, but its a house rule none the less. So is having Cometfall in your game. It's a houserule to allow anything other than the core spells.
edsonaoki 09-14-04, 11:01 PM	Originally Posted by BW0222 At 20th-level, not many creatures couldn't take 20d6 damage - assuming that they didn't make their saving throw. I'm seeing 400hp dragons, 200hp giants, or a 150hp demon. Not many wouldn't save for half, have SR, etc. Flame strike does 15d6 (and it is only 4th), fire seeds can do about the same (6th). And of course baneful polymorph is a save or almost dead spell at 5th. Yes, and at 20th-level, horrild wiltings, polar rays, chain lightnings and delayed fireballs also can't do more than 20d6 damage so, what's the point? Only meteor swarm gets above that, and gets quickly superpassed since it has static damage whereas cometfalls scales indefinety at epic levels. Originally Posted by Sphyre Take too much away from the poor druids and they won't even have any spells worth casting anymore. Uhh... give a simple damage cap for a spell is "take too much" for a class which has already has wildshape, animal companion, dozens of spells, 4 skill points/level, and cleric's HD and BAB? What about the "poor cleric"? Biggest/easiest fix: You don't like it? Don't allow it in your game - it's not a core spell. It's complete divine. You don't see many people complaining about the BoED, because it's so rediculously broken that 95% of all DMs ban it! That's not a point. If I were the DM, I could allow or not allow what I want, whether is a non-core spell or a core class feature. My 2 cents: It's a druid spell worth casting, but doesn't overshadow other 6th level spells to where I wouldn't choose others over it - that's balance imho. Not at 13th-level, but see the other posts. I like the spell, actually. Bear in mind that at 20th level, you also have access to four 9th level spells, so you could choose instead of Cometfall to cast Miracle (Divine Intervention), Implosion (ouch.), Storm of Vengeance (360' radius, look at what it does each round to an army!), or Summon Monster 9 (how do you pronounce Couatl?). At 17th level the damage would be 16d6 for Cometfall, or for the cost of 5000 xp you could ask your Deity to send everyone in that 10' square to the lowest level of Hell with banners reading "Asmodeus Sux" In all seriousness, I've seen worse spells as far as mechanics are involved. And in the campaigns I play in, for a Cleric to have access to a new spell like this, he would have to research it for 1 day per level, roll a check to see if he is granted the spell, and even if he makes his roll his deity/dm can always say nope. Of course, the 9th level spells get different saves and some are subject to SR. You're comparing 9th-level spells with a 6th-level spell. That's pointless. Now, back to the original issue, why the spell doesn't have a damage cap? Or better, if DD spells are so useless, why do ALL other spells have damage caps? I also haven't realized that Cometfall isn't subject to SR. Thanks to smrtgmp for pointing.
Oberoni 09-14-04, 11:03 PM	I'm talking about normal campaigns, not ultra-power campaigns (I assume that's your case since you said undead are wusses). And the issue is not whether cometfall is better than other spells. The issue is why the DM Guide tells that divine spells should have damage caps lesser than arcane spells, and they throw out a DD spell with no damage cap at all. Who cares? No, seriously, I mean that...who cares? Damage spells at higher levels lose a lot of punch. HP values start to skyrocket, as not only are creatures and PCs getting more Hit Dice, but they're getting higher constitution scores to go along with it. So we have a damage spell that can only be used outdoors, and it has no cap. Who cares? I don't mean in a comparative sense. I mean, if you never ever read about damage caps and other nonsense, would the output of this spell scare you? Do you think Cometfall can ruin campaigns? I just don't see enough cause for concern on this one. So it eliminates damage caps on spells, which aren't really a sound mechanic to begin with. So...who cares?
Sphyre 09-14-04, 11:34 PM	Wait wait... edsonaoki, you first go on arguing about normal campaigns not uber-powerful ones and then go on to argue about the damage cap? "Normal campaigns" you rarely even reach the damage cap in the first place. It's not even until epic levels does it's lack of a damage cap (other than the ceiling) even become debatable. Where's the consistency in what you're saying? It seems to me you're more flustered that the spell even exists, rather than it's use. Uhh... give a simple damage cap for a spell is "take too much" for a class which has already has wildshape, animal companion, dozens of spells, 4 skill points/level, and cleric's HD and BAB? What about the "poor cleric"? Heh, the poor cleric got nerfed. :P Druids are indeed amazing, but that doesn't mean that their 6th level powers should be the equivilent of what a wizard gets at level 1. It is a full caster afterall. Look at fireseeds. It's more broken when used well. Personally, I don't see much of a problem with the casters as is, moreso the fighter is well.. pales in comparison. Cometfall isn't the making or breaking factor. I've also noticed, most of the druids best offensive evocations and other attack spells such as cometfall all have reflex saves. The druid gets count, 3 save or dies (2 core, 1 complete divine) *** Also a little sidenote, I've noticed guidelines for damage caps are really only there for custom spells to make sure they don't overshadow the spells already made. WotC has released a lot of balanecd and imbalanced spells. Some of which break damage caps and some of which don't. It's better to balance off comparison in level to other spells of that type of casting rather than off damage caps - when you're looking for true balance compared to existing spells.
smrtgmp 09-15-04, 05:11 AM	So is having Cometfall in your game. It's a houserule to allow anything other than the core spells. Give me a break. Its still an official WotC sanctioned spell that violates the damage caps they published. Even if it was only single target, the cap for a 6th level divine spell is supposed to be 15 dice of damage. If the spell was subject to SR, I wouldnt have as much of a problem with it. Take a look at the other conjuration spells. Most of them dont even come close to the damage caps, let alone surpass them. Wait wait... edsonaoki, you first go on arguing about normal campaigns not uber-powerful ones and then go on to argue about the damage cap? "Normal campaigns" you rarely even reach the damage cap in the first place. It's not even until epic levels does it's lack of a damage cap (other than the ceiling) even become debatable. Except that if it followed the damage cap guidelines it would max out at 15 dice of damage at 15th level, which is hardly epic play. Even then it would be a good spell, since it isnt subject to SR, deals typeless damage, can knock the targets prone, and leaves a field of rubble in its wake. Thats an awful lot of stuff for a 6th level divine spell to do. If the level was raised to 7 or 8, I would have no problem with the spell. As is, however, I feel its too powerful, especially when you concider its a Conjuration spell, which arent supposed to be the best nukes. Also a little sidenote, I've noticed guidelines for damage caps are really only there for custom spells to make sure they don't overshadow the spells already made. WotC has released a lot of balanecd and imbalanced spells. Some of which break damage caps and some of which don't. It's better to balance off comparison in level to other spells of that type of casting rather than off damage caps - when you're looking for true balance compared to existing spells.So the guidelines are only there to insure that home made spells arent as good as the ones WotC publishes? That makes a lot of sense. :rolleyes: Even if you take your own advice and compare it to other 6th level divine spells, it is clearly more powerful, regardless of the fact it cant be used to its full capacity indoors. IMO, its situational nature doesnt justify blatantly violating the guidelines they released themselves. As I pointed out above, domination and other [mind-affecting] spells are worthless against undead, constructs, vermin, etc., yet that doesnt detract from their power. They are still excellent spells in the right situations. The same goes for cometfall. As far as damaging spells are concerned, its is above par when used properly (i.e. outdoors). Ask yourself a question. If this spell didnt exist in a WotC book, and a player of yours came to you with a 6th level divine spell that had no damage cap, dealt typeless damage, wasnt subject to SR, and inflicted a number of secondary effects, would you allow it? I wouldn't.
Naeron 09-15-04, 05:41 AM	And the issue is not whether cometfall is better than other spells. The issue is why the DM Guide tells that divine spells should have damage caps lesser than arcane spells, and they throw out a DD spell with no damage cap at all. Because it is a guideline for spell design not an absolute rule. Every class has its "powerful" spells that push the envelope of what their level allows. And in regard to the original post its a bit silly to compare the maximised damage of a 6th level spell to the average damage of a 9th level spell (which does 8d6 bludgeoning and 24d6 fire for an average of 112). Compare it instead with the maximised damage of other 6th level spells. A Maximised Chain Lighting at 20th level would do 120 damage to one target and 60 damage to up to 20 additional targets within 30ft. A Maximised Delayed Blast Fireball does 120 damage. Yes it is one level higher but it has no limitations and the delay benefit. Cometfall has the limitation that indoors it will usually be fairly useless as the vast majority of ceilings will not be more than 40ft high. A Maximised Blade Barrier caps out at 90 damage but is equally useful indoors as well as outside. Cometfall gets better damage (and only at 16th level does this actually become a factor) than other spells because it has a major limitation when used indoors.
Sacrusha 09-15-04, 05:51 AM	Naeron: If Cometfall would deal elemental damage and would not have any other effects than dealing damage, and would allow SR, then your comparision would be valid. But if you think "Hierophant" and "strand of prayer beads", then it is clear that this spell needs a CL cap, either cl20 or even lower. If the campaign in which the spell will be used does not play underground at least 95% of the time, then it also needs to be of higher level (7th to 10th, depends). If the campaign plays outdoors all the time, then it is a 10th level spell (with a cap at cl 25), because it is significantly stronger than meteor swarm (less dmg, no SR, not elemental damage, knocks targets prone, is a divine spell (altough I slowly get the feeling divine spells are meant to be more powerful, be it save or die, damage, buff, or protection spells)).
abjurer 09-15-04, 09:12 AM	the spell simply creates a rock in the sky and lets it fall. So you can say: no more than 20d6 damage from that falling object no matter how high it is at the beginning by using the rules for damage from falling objects...and voilà you have your damage cap ready with a shiny explanation for your players.
edsonaoki 09-15-04, 09:17 AM	Originally Posted by Oberoni I don't mean in a comparative sense. I mean, if you never ever read about damage caps and other nonsense, would the output of this spell scare you? Do you think Cometfall can ruin campaigns? I just don't see enough cause for concern on this one. So it eliminates damage caps on spells, which aren't really a sound mechanic to begin with. So...who cares? Read the previous post. So, WHY does all other spells have damage caps? Imho, Cometfall may be pretty useful at high levels, especially if you have +1 caster level stuff, and you apply the correct metamagic feats. And it's always a great option against undead, constructs and anyone with spel resistance or elemental resistance. Originally Posted by Sphire Wait wait... edsonaoki, you first go on arguing about normal campaigns not uber-powerful ones and then go on to argue about the damage cap? "Normal campaigns" you rarely even reach the damage cap in the first place. It's not even until epic levels does it's lack of a damage cap (other than the ceiling) even become debatable. Where's the consistency in what you're saying? It seems to me you're more flustered that the spell even exists, rather than it's use. I was not speaking "overpowered" in the sense of high-level campagin, but in the sense of "DM throws CR 20 creatures and effectively plays them as CR 10", or "20th-level PCs have the power of 30th-level PCs"; A Maximised Chain Lighting at 20th level would do 120 damage to one target and 60 damage to up to 20 additional targets within 30ft. Yet a maximised chain lightning has a damage cap, and subject to both spell resistance and energy resistance. With Cometfall you can damage even golems. At Epic, Cometfall reduces Chain Lightning (and all other DD spells, for that matter) to dust. And don't tell me that DD spells are useless at epic levels. Never heard of Intensify Spell, Multispell?
edsonaoki 09-15-04, 09:19 AM	Originally Posted by abjurer the spell simply creates a rock in the sky and lets it fall. So you can say: no more than 20d6 damage from that falling object no matter how high it is at the beginning by using the rules for damage from falling objects...and voilà you have your damage cap ready with a shiny explanation for your players. I don't think anything on D&D world should have a physical explanation (and probably doesn't), but here is: Hard explanation: Air resistance Very easy explanation: Just cap the height
Sphyre 09-15-04, 04:21 PM	Give me a break. Its still an official WotC sanctioned spell that violates the damage caps they published. Even if it was only single target, the cap for a 6th level divine spell is supposed to be 15 dice of damage. If the spell was subject to SR, I wouldnt have as much of a problem with it. Take a look at the other conjuration spells. Most of them dont even come close to the damage caps, let alone surpass them. So... you want me to give you break when you go shredding through my posts? Doesn't look like I'm getting a break here on my opinion. What makes your opinion so much better than mine? Except that if it followed the damage cap guidelines it would max out at 15 dice of damage at 15th level, which is hardly epic play. Even then it would be a good spell, since it isnt subject to SR, deals typeless damage, can knock the targets prone, and leaves a field of rubble in its wake. Thats an awful lot of stuff for a 6th level divine spell to do. If the level was raised to 7 or 8, I would have no problem with the spell. As is, however, I feel its too powerful, especially when you concider its a Conjuration spell, which arent supposed to be the best nukes. Yet conjuration spells ARE supposed to be a druid's best spells, and the druid is relatively good at nuking. So the guidelines are only there to insure that home made spells arent as good as the ones WotC publishes? That makes a lot of sense. :rolleyes: Even if you take your own advice and compare it to other 6th level divine spells, it is clearly more powerful, regardless of the fact it cant be used to its full capacity indoors. It's not clearly more powerful than other 6th level spells I spent 6th level druid slots on other things all the time. Fire Seeds is rediculous in the right situation. Way more effective than Cometfall. Your argument is that it's situational effectiveness doesn't give it the right to break the damage cap. So what about Fire seeds? Holly Berry Bombs. Cast Energy Resistance: Fire (Or if you have a metamagic rod of substitution energy go ahead and use that on fire seeds and use that resistance. Then you walk upto you enemy and say "Bye Bye" speak the command word to blow em up and they take 8d8+Your caster level times 8 damage. That's situationally effective when your opponent doesn't have energy resistance against the energy you're using - but that's way more powerful than comet fall - but some how it's ok in your eyes? IMO, its situational nature doesnt justify blatantly violating the guidelines they released themselves. As I pointed out above, domination and other [mind-affecting] spells are worthless against undead, constructs, vermin, etc., yet that doesnt detract from their power. They are still excellent spells in the right situations. The same goes for cometfall. As far as damaging spells are concerned, its is above par when used properly (i.e. outdoors). I tell you my opinion/interpretation of the guidelines, "I've noticed guidelines..." yet somehow your opinion is better? You've got a real double standard for argumentation here. Ask yourself a question. If this spell didnt exist in a WotC book, and a player of yours came to you with a 6th level divine spell that had no damage cap, dealt typeless damage, wasnt subject to SR, and inflicted a number of secondary effects, would you allow it? I wouldn't. Depends, if it dealt 20d6/caster level, yes. If it were cometfall - that doesn't seem too unreasonable. I do, though, agree that divine offensive spells are strong... just look at flamestrike. It's a 4th level spell for the druid - that's rediculous. By the guidelines flamestrike should be both 6th level for the druid and cleric - but it's not. You're barking up the wrong tree. Divine casters are full casters, and for some reason WotC makes them strong, but that doesn't mean they overshadow the arcane casters. Cometfall is hardly game breaking in relation to all the other spells divine casters get.
smrtgmp 09-15-04, 07:59 PM	So... you want me to give you break when you go shredding through my posts? Doesn't look like I'm getting a break here on my opinion. What makes your opinion so much better than mine?My opinion is no more valid than yours. I must apologize; I like a spirited debate, and some times I get a bit riled up. I'm sorry if my comments came off as condesending (which, after re-reading them, it seems like they did). Yet conjuration spells ARE supposed to be a druid's best spells, and the druid is relatively good at nuking.Conjuration (Summoning) spells are supposed to be a druids best spells, hence his ability to spontaneously cast summoning spells (dont even get me started on that). It's not clearly more powerful than other 6th level spells I spent 6th level druid slots on other things all the time. Fire Seeds is rediculous in the right situation. Way more effective than Cometfall. Your argument is that it's situational effectiveness doesn't give it the right to break the damage cap. So what about Fire seeds? Yeah, fire seeds is a beast. However, at hight levels pretty much everything has some sort of resistance to fire. Also, fire seeds is only one example of a 6th level spell, and it is more powerful than a majoraty of other 6th level divine spells as well. Holly Berry Bombs. Cast Energy Resistance: Fire (Or if you have a metamagic rod of substitution energy go ahead and use that on fire seeds and use that resistance.I've never seen a Metamagic Rod of Energy Substitution, but that would indeed be nasty That's situationally effective when your opponent doesn't have energy resistance against the energy you're using - but that's way more powerful than comet fall - but some how it's ok in your eyes?I think fire seeds is over powered too. As is flamestrike at 4th level. I am merely of the opinion that the WotC published spells should follow the damage guidlines that they created. If they arent going to do that, than what is the point of having said damage guidelines? If it is only to insure that homebrew spells will always be subpar when compared to official spells, than I call foul. I tell you my opinion/interpretation of the guidelines, "I've noticed guidelines..." yet somehow your opinion is better? You've got a real double standard for argumentation here.See my original comment on this post. By the guidelines flamestrike should be both 6th level for the druid and cleric - but it's not. You're barking up the wrong tree. Divine casters are full casters, and for some reason WotC makes them strong, but that doesn't mean they overshadow the arcane casters.This is the point I have been trying to convey. Divine Casters arent supposed to be good nukers. The wizard's ability to blow his opponents to bits is supposed to be so powerful that he has poor BAB, horrible hit points, an inability to wear armor or effectively wield decent weapons, and only one good save as a balancing mechanism. How then, do they justify clerics and druids being full casters with 3/4 BAB, good hit points, two good saves, and the abiltiy to wear armor? Not to mention a butt load of class abilities in the case of the druid. Are arcane spell casters underpowered? Certainly not. Should they have a monopoly on battle spells? IMO, yes. Otherwise it gets harder and harder to justify their inherent weaknessess when compared to the diven casters.
beaver1024 09-15-04, 08:46 PM	Guys it's a Divine spell from the Complete Disaster . What do you expect? Already in core rules clerics/druids can blast just as well as wizards. As unbalanced as Comet Fall is there are other materials in the Complete Disaster that are far more broken. Divine Metamagic, Domain Sponteneity and Quill Blast are just some of the things that are worse than Comet Fall. Domain Sponteneity makes look Comet Fall underpowered. With 1 feat alone the cleric becomes a better wizard than a wizard and a better sorcerer than a sorcerer. We all know Priest of the Coast's love of the divine spellcaster. Does this really surprise anyone?
Sphyre 09-15-04, 10:28 PM	I've never seen a Metamagic Rod of Energy Substitution, but that would indeed be nasty Tome and blood.
toomre 09-16-04, 01:24 AM	It doesn't follow the spell-creation guidelines, true. However, I can't honestly believe your indignation over this spell, you sound like it's the worst thing since the pre-errata shapechange. There are far more broken and abuse-friendly spells in that book and even in core. You're right that if your PC came to you with this spell you wouldn't allow it, but then if they weren't already in the books, most DM's wouldn't allow these spells as they've been written either: miasma, quill blast, shapechange, polymorph any object, touch of idiocy, true strike, solid fog, animal growth, spikes, divine power, giant vermin, telekinesis and a dozen others. And the list of abusable and broken items, feats, and prestige classes is pretty big too. I'm not sure why you're so adamant about comet fall, cap it if it pleases you, but I seriously doubt that it would have been a threat to your game's balance and flow if you left it uncapped. All I'm saying, despite agreeing with you that all spells ought to have caps, is that you should pick a battle that makes a difference. PS. please don't comment to say that the spells listed above are not overpowered for their level, I'm sure you'll agree that some of them are and that was my whole point.
Sphyre 09-16-04, 02:04 AM	hahaha yeah miasma pre-errata was insane - save or die... without the save! just the die. spell :P
smrtgmp 09-16-04, 04:14 AM	It doesn't follow the spell-creation guidelines, true. However, I can't honestly believe your indignation over this spell, you sound like it's the worst thing since the pre-errata shapechange. I never said it was the most broken spell in existance. The only reason I focused my ire at cometfall is that it was the original topic of this thread. There are certainly more broken/abusable spells in the game. I dont think anyone's debating that. All I'm saying, despite agreeing with you that all spells ought to have caps, is that you should pick a battle that makes a difference.Nothing anyone dabates on these boards will make a difference. Does that mean we shouldnt dicuss the balance of a spell we feel needs some work? PS. please don't comment to say that the spells listed above are not overpowered for their level, I'm sure you'll agree that some of them are and that was my whole point. Some of the spells listed above are not overpowered for their level. :P
Sphyre 09-16-04, 05:06 AM	Nothing anyone dabates on these boards will make a difference. Does that mean we shouldnt dicuss the balance of a spell we feel needs some work? That's not true. Look at the righteous Might/divine power nerf! Everone says "clerics fight better than fighter!" and what happened? They nerfed it. The boards are just one of many of the mediums WotC gets feedback on their products. Shapechange? Yeah that too. A lot of things that have been changed you'll find several posts constantly saying stuff about it on the boards. I'll be damned if it didn't at least somewhat contribute to the erratas.
The Simbul 09-16-04, 01:08 PM	The maximum possible damage from a falling object is 20d6. So yes, this broken piece of :censored: spell does have a damage cap, just not a cap in its actual spell description. P.S. and yes it would be nice if 3.5 sourcebooks actually contained spells balanced and equitable for 3.5...that way we dont have to go out and spend another $30-$40 on a 3.75 or 4.0 version of the same sourcebook and same spell, just because te playtesters were lazy. P.P.S. I also find the notion of Divine spells being equitable to Arcane spells in the offensive/harmful magic department to be a bit ridiculous, given that there has to be a point to having half as many HP, a weaker BAB and BSB, the inability to wear armor, and not having a primary spellcasting ability score tied to a saving throw stat.
smrtgmp 09-16-04, 08:23 PM	That's not true. Look at the righteous Might/divine power nerf! Everone says "clerics fight better than fighter!" and what happened? They nerfed it. The boards are just one of many of the mediums WotC gets feedback on their products. Shapechange? Yeah that too. A lot of things that have been changed you'll find several posts constantly saying stuff about it on the boards. I'll be damned if it didn't at least somewhat contribute to the erratas. And how long did that take? Granted, there is a slim chance that enough complaints about a given spell will result in erratta, but I highly doubt that there will be changes to spells outside of the PHB. Funny that you would mention righteous might. Prior to editing my above post, I actually had "(with the exception of righteous might and divine favor)" after the sentance that you quoted, but I removed it because they did not acknowledge that the changes were due to customer complaint. Rather,they claimed it was because after much deliberation on their part and further playtesting, they were deemed to be too powerful. I'm sure our kevethching had something to do with it, but if that's the case, they didnt admit to it. I also find the notion of Divine spells being equitable to Arcane spells in the offensive/harmful magic department to be a bit ridiculous, given that there has to be a point to having half as many HP, a weaker BAB and BSB, the inability to wear armor, and not having a primary spellcasting ability score tied to a saving throw stat. I couldnt agree more.
Hammerhead 09-16-04, 08:48 PM	Im pretty sure damage from falling objects is capped at 20d6. Cant remember what book says it though. Also the damage isnt typeless its bludgeoning, meaning it wouldnt work on somthing immune to that.
deafbymetal 09-16-04, 08:49 PM	A few people have made reference to my previous post on this subject, not understanding my comparison of a 6th level spell to a 9th. I will try to explain this. A 9th level spell such as Miracle has a higher save, which in a fight I always try to use the spell that does most bang. Also, consider that at 17th level you have a choice between causing 16d6 damage, with a Reflex save of ,for the sake of argument we'll use 22. Or, using Miracle, which has a save depending on how its used (if not using to gain another spell, probably has no save, or if used to cast a spell would have a save DC of 25, using above example). Yes, they are of diferent levels, but if you shoot someone and kill them, does it matter if it's a .22 or a 9mm? I do not sit there and think "Gee, maybe I should save this spell in case I run into another Balor today", unless of course I'm in Hell. I would rather live through the current encounter and complain about using the wrong spell later, than the reverse. Also, with Miracle, your Deity is stepping in and taking action on your behalf. I do not think there is a damage cap on Divine Intervention. Also, a DM always has the option of saying no. Always. House rules have also always been, and always will be, a given in D&D. Finally, as far as the FUBAR in spell caps, consistency, mechanics, etc., think about it. WoTC is a corporation owned by Hasbro, another corporation. The bottom line, regardless of what anyone says, is "Is this product line making a profit?". And to make a profit, products must be introduced into the market and sold, again and again. So if they did not have the time to proof read and playtest, it comes down simple capitalism. Someone, somewhere, was rushing the team that made the book to get it done. You can't blame them for that, I know I face deadlines every day at work. That's life. As far as Cometfall goes, if it seems out of balance in a campaign, me and the people I play with may come to say that yeah, it's f'ed up, and change it. House Rule # whatever. And move on. Not continually b*tch about it. Remember, it's just a game. And if something is broke, and you have an idea on how to fix it, just do it. It may not be a good fix for everyone, but if it works for your game, fine. End of subject.
deafbymetal 09-16-04, 08:57 PM	Im pretty sure damage from falling objects is capped at 20d6. Cant remember what book says it though. Also the damage isnt typeless its bludgeoning, meaning it wouldnt work on somthing immune to that. Page 303, DMG 3.5
Sphyre 09-16-04, 09:23 PM	And how long did that take? Granted, there is a slim chance that enough complaints about a given spell will result in erratta, but I highly doubt that there will be changes to spells outside of the PHB. Yeah, but it happened. I dunno about you, but they errataed the XPH and that isn't in the core rules. The people will speak! The more people that speak, the harder it is for WotC to ignore it :P
deafbymetal 09-16-04, 09:37 PM	The people will speak! The more people that speak, the harder it is for WotC to ignore it :P Keep on believing that. I prefer reality :D . Just let me know when Bill Gates personally responds to your e-mails on how he should change Windows. This is not a personal attack against you, Sphyre. Please do not take it as such ;)
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 09-16-04, 09:43 PM	The maximum possible damage from a falling object is 20d6. So yes, this broken piece of :censored: spell does have a damage cap, just not a cap in its actual spell description. Falling damage caps at 20d6. Weight damage does not cap.
deafbymetal 09-16-04, 10:10 PM	Falling damage caps at 20d6. Weight damage does not cap. No, it does not. But, in Cometfall, the description says it's a 400 pound ball of ice and rock, which would be 2d6 damage for weight, and the damage cap for distance would be 20d6, for a spell damage cap of 22d6. I think. Seeing as the weight damage is not mentioned in the spell description. Damn corporate America, damn them to hell.
BW0222 09-16-04, 11:00 PM	edsonaoki, >>At 20th-level, not many creatures couldn't take 20d6 damage - assuming >>that they didn't make their saving throw. I'm seeing 400hp dragons, 200hp >>giants, or a 150hp demon. Not many wouldn't save for half, have SR, etc. >>Flame strike does 15d6 (and it is only 4th), fire seeds can do about the >>same (6th). And of course baneful polymorph is a save or almost dead >>spell at 5th. >Yes, and at 20th-level, horrild wiltings, polar rays, chain lightnings and >delayed fireballs also can't do more than 20d6 damage so, what's the point? It is all pointless because 20d6 damage with a save is going to be useless against any 20th-level encounter you are likely to run into. If you come up against a 600hp dragon with +20 to reflex saves, even a maximized comet fall is a waste of an action. >You're comparing 9th-level spells with a 6th-level spell. That's pointless. First, your post included an example of a maximized comet fall. That is a 9th-level spell. Second, you are talking 20th-level here, so it is perfectly valid to compare it against other spells which you could cast and which your opponent will be casting back at you. >Now, back to the original issue, why the spell doesn't have a damage cap? >Or better, if DD spells are so useless, why do ALL other spells have damage >caps? It doesn't have a damage cap because it has several built-in limitations -- the key being that it only does that type of damage outdoors. Indoors, in most dungeons, etc. it does significantly less damage. It also has a smaller radius than even a fireball, so that is less creatures taking the damage. This is the same as why spells requiring attack rolls or saves can do more damage than those which hit automatically or don't allow saves. >horrild wiltings, polar rays, chain lightnings and >delayed fireballs also can't do more than 20d6 damage so, what's the point? a) Because they always do level x d6 damage regardless of the situation. b) They operate indoors, underground, etc. at full effect. c) They affect a larger area and/or more targets. With comet fall, you only get the possibility of more damage in specific cases in exchange it affects a much smaller area and/or fewer targets and it does almost no damage in many common situations -- an inn, a dungeon, a cavern, inside a castle, inside a ship, etc., with a 10'-20' ceiling. (I don't know about you, but that is a killer limit in 75%+ of most D&D combats.) If a player wished to research a 6th-level version of delayed blast airball which only affected a 5' radius and where the damage was limited by the wind speed, I'd happily allow unlimited dice damage. Thanks, Brett
Sphyre 09-17-04, 04:37 AM	Keep on believing that. I prefer reality :D . Just let me know when Bill Gates personally responds to your e-mails on how he should change Windows. This is not a personal attack against you, Sphyre. Please do not take it as such ;) I did say harder not "it can't be ignored." :) I chose my words as such as to keep that open endedness. No offense taken, it's just that most people don't realize that I specifically word things certain ways for a reason. Of course, I expect people to get the gist of what i say every once and a while without taking time to watch how i word things... talk about inconsistency, huh? 'tis sad to know you know you can think someone's so naive off one sentence though... Oh and... if you want something done right, do it yourself, no need to email bill gates... If bill gates had a penny for each time a windows system crashed, he'd be... wait! He already is!
axel_621 09-17-04, 05:17 AM	Page 303, DMG 3.5 I'd just like to reiterate what deafbymetal said, since this answers your question. The spell is capped at 20d6, because a falling object's damage is capped at 20d6. The mechanics of the cometfall spell are consistent with the Falling Objects rule. It is unfortunate that they did not also reprint this piece of information in the spell description, but it doesn't stop it from effecting it none the less.
Sphyre 09-17-04, 05:43 AM	Interesting take on it: FALLING OBJECTS Just as characters take damage when they fall more than 10 feet, so too do they take damage when they are hit by falling objects. Objects that fall upon characters deal damage based on their weight and the distance they have fallen. For each 200 pounds of an object’s weight, the object deals 1d6 points of damage, provided it falls at least 10 feet. Distance also comes into play, adding an additional 1d6 points of damage for every 10-foot increment it falls beyond the first (to a maximum of 20d6 points of damage). It certainly seems to imply that it's a falling object, although there are a few inconsistencies. If you assume that it's a falling object, DR also applies, as bludgeoning damage, when spells are not subject to DR. The spell's damage doesn't follow that of the falling objects rules *shrugs* personally i have no problem with the spell, as a player or a DM. It's not gonna break my game. Hehe, it's fun playing :devil:'s advocate and defending the spell as written. I personally, if i'm gonna play an overpowered druid, would like options on my overpowered spells in the first place, as opposed to being limited to only some over powered ones :P
smrtgmp 09-17-04, 05:56 AM	Yeah, but it happened. I dunno about you, but they errataed the XPH and that isn't in the core rules. Yes, they erratad the XPH (for which my telepath is eternaly grateful. Hooray for the erratad domitate), but that wasnt because of customer complaints. It was more of a "woops, my bad" kind of thing.
Sphyre 09-17-04, 06:13 AM	agreed, solicit psicrystal was required to use that power effectively before, I'm glad I didn't play a Telepath until after the fact :P
smrtgmp 09-17-04, 06:31 AM	Given how quickly the XPH errata was released, there wasnt exactly a lot of time to play a telepath using the pre-errata dominate. But yeah, I didnt start my telepath until after the errata was released. Actually, my thrallheard isnt quite to the point where he gets dominate for free, so I havent gotten to use it yet. Only...two...levels...left :schemes: I guess I'll have to make due with death urge till then.
Sphyre 09-17-04, 07:30 AM	My... "friend" is a psionics fanatic and bought the XPH the first day it was available, so it had been some time before the errata for me, cause i read through the XPH the first day he had it. I remember the psihandbook forum saying "Is it out yet? i heard a rumor!" lol
Craque 09-17-04, 09:13 AM	I guess we'll just have to wait until Complete Arcane comes out to see if the people at WotC are truly letting their "make the divine casters ALL POWERFUL amongst the PC's!" urge get the better of them. If the damage and power caps on spells in Complete Arcane are also broken in favor of arcane casters then the playing field will be even once more since all the "Complete" books will have done is push up the caps a bit for both sides. It's already obvious with the two previous "Complete" books that WotC are moving everyone up the power curve.
beaver1024 09-17-04, 12:24 PM	I guess we'll just have to wait until Complete Arcane comes out to see if the people at WotC are truly letting their "make the divine casters ALL POWERFUL amongst the PC's!" urge get the better of them. If the damage and power caps on spells in Complete Arcane are also broken in favor of arcane casters then the playing field will be even once more since all the "Complete" books will have done is push up the caps a bit for both sides. It's already obvious with the two previous "Complete" books that WotC are moving everyone up the power curve. If WoTC moves up the power curve for arcane casters in Complete Arcane then they have lost any shred of credibility they have left. I will only buy WoTC's product if they are balanced and fun to play with without much tinkering around. Producing overpowered broken material is just as bad as producing underpowered crap. By making divine casters as powerful as they have WoTC have painted themselves in a corner. All other materials for other classes will have to be balanced to the same standard or else they will be seens as, at best, biased and, at worst, incompetant. As the gap between divine casters and the rest of the classes are so huge they will have to increase the power level of future material so much that they will not be able to maintain balance. I think the only viable solution open to WoTC is to heavily nerf divine casters until they are at the same level as arcane casters. The changes they did for Divine Favour and Righteous Might is a step in the right direction. But I think it's too little too late. As long as things like Comet Fall exists unerrated and unnerfed, WoTC will be very hard pressed to produce balanced material in the future. I'm betting that PoTC's design team really can't let go of their divine spellcasting bias. Following the trend of 3.5 to heavily nerf many areas of arcane spellcasting to uselessness I'm predicting Complete Arcane to be as filled with underpowered crap as Complete Divine is filled with overpowered brokeness.
edsonaoki 09-17-04, 12:55 PM	Originally Posted by BW0222 Originally Posted by It is all pointless because 20d6 damage with a save is going to be useless against any 20th-level encounter you are likely to run into. If you come up against a 600hp dragon with +20 to reflex saves, even a maximized comet fall is a waste of an action. Not quite. Reflex save is the worst saving throw of a dragon. Plus, Comet is not subject to SR. A true waste of time is to use a save or die spell that has to pass the dragon's SR, it's giantic Fortitude saving throw, and may be easilly warded with a simple mid-level spell. The simple fact of ignoring SR and energy resistance makes cometfall one of the best nukes against outsiders and dragons. I didn't even mentioned the lack of damage cap. First, your post included an example of a maximized comet fall. That is a 9th-level spell. Second, you are talking 20th-level here, so it is perfectly valid to compare it against other spells which you could cast and which your opponent will be casting back at you. yes, and in this example I compared with other 9th-level spells. I was complaining about people comparing the non-metamagicked cometfall with 9th-level spells. It doesn't have a damage cap because it has several built-in limitations -- the key being that it only does that type of damage outdoors. Indoors, in most dungeons, etc. it does significantly less damage. It also has a smaller radius than even a fireball, so that is less creatures taking the damage. This is the same as why spells requiring attack rolls or saves can do more damage than those which hit automatically or don't allow saves. Cometfall ignores SR and energy resistance. This is already a great plus. And, spells that require attack rolls have damage caps. With comet fall, you only get the possibility of more damage in specific cases in exchange it affects a much smaller area and/or fewer targets and it does almost no damage in many common situations -- an inn, a dungeon, a cavern, inside a castle, inside a ship, etc., with a 10'-20' ceiling. Ray spells only hit one single creature and even they have damage caps. They don't allow saves, but they are subject to SR and ER. (I don't know about you, but that is a killer limit in 75%+ of most D&D combats.) You wanna mean "in my campaign that is a killer limit in 75%+ of most D&D combats"? continuing the subject... About cometfall being game-breaking or not, no, it's not. Yes, there are spells who are more game-breaking. But for the exhaustively debated issues from this topic, cometfall is inconsistent, just like the Epic Spellcasting rules from ELH. Would be game-breaking to have wizards being able to cast cure spells or even turn undead? Certainly not. Would it be consistent? No. Because there are supposed to be differences between wizard/sorcerers magic and clerics/druids magic. What DOES differentiate those spell lists? If there is no consistency into this, I can simply pick up any one wizard spell and make it a cleric spell (and actually, that is already happening). And yes, Wiz/Sor magic MUST be better than Cle/Dru magic. And it must be MUCH better, to explain why wizard/sorcerers have so pathetic physical abilities, gain no other abilities besides their spells, and last but not least, they don't learn automatically all their spells from their spell lists as clerics and druids do. A wizard spends 100 gp/spell level per spell, which greatly affects how much the character has left for buying equipment. A sorcerer has a very limited number of spells, and often has to sacrifice versality.
smrtgmp 09-17-04, 06:09 PM	In my ongoing mission to completely derail this thread ;) My... "friend" is a psionics fanatic and bought the XPH the first day it was available, so it had been some time before the errata for me, cause i read through the XPH the first day he had it. I remember the psihandbook forum saying "Is it out yet? i heard a rumor!" lol Yeah, I got it the day after it came out. But there was that XPH clarifications thread that was posted almost immediately after tha book was released, and one of the things they adressed was psionic dominate. But you're right about the official errata, it took a while for that to be released. I'll stop with my off-topic posts now. :)
axel_621 09-17-04, 07:23 PM	Interesting take on it: It certainly seems to imply that it's a falling object, although there are a few inconsistencies. If you assume that it's a falling object, DR also applies, as bludgeoning damage, when spells are not subject to DR. The spell's damage doesn't follow that of the falling objects rules It does a little more than imply it. It outright states it. The comet appears 5 feet per caster level above the ground or at the ceiling, whichever is lower. The comet immediatley falls, dealing 2d6 points of damage per 10 feet fallen to everything in the 10-foot-square area directly below it. Note the bolded section. Basically all the spell is doing is conjuring a big rock that falls from a height. Doesn't get much closer to the rules than that. Although you are right that it doesn't quite match the damage rules, but it is a spell so I would assume they wanted to spruce it up a bit. As to the DR, falling objects do not do bludgeoning damage either. As per the cometfall spell, they simply do damage. But since the source of the damage is a spell, cometfall is not subject to DR, whereas a "normal" falling comet is. A bit strange, but that's how it works. Personally, I think Conjuration(Creation) spells should be subject to DR, since it is actually an object doing the damage, not the spell itself; that's how they get around SR. But the rules aren't perfectly clear on that. Actually that kinda brings up two further questions about that: 1. Are Conjuration (Creation) spells with a duration of Instantaneous subject to DR if they do damage? 2. Does DR apply to falling and falling objects? I ask #2 because it seems a bit silly, now that I think about it, that a character wearing adamantine plate takes 3 points less damage when falling. Anyone else think that sounds a bit silly?
smrtgmp 09-17-04, 07:44 PM	1. Are Conjuration (Creation) spells with a duration of Instantaneous subject to DR if they do damage? 2. Does DR apply to falling and falling objects? 1) I would say no. It would make sense, but by the rules, spells arent subject to DR. From the SRD:Spells, spell-like abilities, and energy attacks (even nonmagical fire) ignore damage reduction. 2) I have no idea I ask #2 because it seems a bit silly, now that I think about it, that a character wearing adamantine plate takes 3 points less damage when falling. Anyone else think that sounds a bit silly? Sounds a bit odd to me.
Count Arioch the 28th 09-17-04, 07:46 PM	Shapechange? Yeah that too. Wrong. It wasn't nerfed in any reasonable way. Reducing the max HD to 25 means nothing when it still allows SU abilities.
Sphyre 09-17-04, 10:19 PM	Wrong. It wasn't nerfed in any reasonable way. Reducing the max HD to 25 means nothing when it still allows SU abilities. Heh, my point was it was still nerfed. That doesn't make me wrong :P I think their logic was it was supposed to open up supernatural abilities, but their way of cutting off the powerful ones are by use of the HD cap. Doesn't mean it's balanced, but that doesn't mean that they didn't change it either. The 2hd/caster level 50 HD cap just made it all that much more abusable. *** axel_621, lovely isn't it? All open to interpretation. While 3.5 is a lot better on being less ambiguous than 3e, or the earlier versions of D&D, it still exists.
Dimeron 09-17-04, 11:57 PM	I guess we'll just have to wait until Complete Arcane comes out to see if the people at WotC are truly letting their "make the divine casters ALL POWERFUL amongst the PC's!" urge get the better of them. If the damage and power caps on spells in Complete Arcane are also broken in favor of arcane casters then the playing field will be even once more since all the "Complete" books will have done is push up the caps a bit for both sides. It's already obvious with the two previous "Complete" books that WotC are moving everyone up the power curve. Well, since WOTC is throwing the entire divine is healing/buffing and arcane is offensive out of the window, I say let arcane get healing as well. Might as well. Seriously though, with every little release divine DD spell gets better. I guess soon enough Divine spells will deal more damage than arcane spells.
gbnogkfs 09-24-04, 03:36 AM	the errata is out: cometfall has been capped at 20 dice
dirkformica 09-24-04, 04:20 AM	the errata is out: cometfall has been capped at 20 dice Well, there you go. Capped at 20d6. Off topic, but what's even more interesting, to me, is the clarification for Divine Metamagic. I know some were hoping it would be errataed similar to the Incantatrix, but it was not. They only stipulated you were required to take the metamagic feat you were applying Divine Metamagic to. Sorry cleric-haters. ;)
smrtgmp 09-24-04, 04:48 AM	Its still higher than the suggested cap for a 6th level divine spell, but its certainly better than nothing. I dont have nearly as big of a problem with it post-errata. :ayyyy!:
Gnarl 09-24-04, 05:36 AM	Chain Lightening is 20d6 too, no big deal.
Sphyre 09-24-04, 05:54 AM	Its still higher than the suggested cap for a 6th level divine spell, but its certainly better than nothing. I dont have nearly as big of a problem with it post-errata. :ayyyy!: *shakes head* never played in epic levels (or a divine caster 18th level or higher with a prayer bead) until then... the point is moot ;)
smrtgmp 09-24-04, 07:57 AM	for you maybe. that doesnt mean that there aren't people who have witnessed spellcasters with caster levels above 20 well before epic levels.
Sphyre 09-24-04, 08:14 AM	indeed why i said "until then..." :P Then it's just plain broken.... 6th level slot for rediculous amounts of damage and a petty check that anything epic could make ;)
kjenks 09-24-04, 09:08 AM	Modified by the new Complete Divine Errata to max out at 20d6.
Sphyre 09-24-04, 02:20 PM	yes kjenks, if you haven't noticed gbnogkfs (what a gibberish name...) already posted that.
smrtgmp 09-24-04, 04:02 PM	you forgot the :P :P
gbnogkfs 09-24-04, 11:20 PM	yes kjenks, if you haven't noticed gbnogkfs (what a gibberish name...) already posted that. hey, it's copyrighted :D
Sphyre 09-25-04, 03:32 AM	:uh-huh: Copywrited? that gibberish?! whoa... If that's true... i'd have seen everything then.