Cyrad RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16 |
Orfamay Quest |
A lot of monsters are tough (especially outsiders) because of spell resistance. You would probably want to compensate in some way or lower the CR.
Case in point: the Tarrasque. With SR 36, even a 20th level caster has a hard time landing a spell on it. Remove this, and it's Will save is a rather pathetic +12, which means any non "mind-affecting" Will negates effect will pound the poor helpless beast into stupefication.
bitter lily |
Spell Resistance is essentially Armor Class vs. Magic, but it only shows up on certain/tough opponents.
Imagine if we removed Armor Class except on certain/tough enemies..
The big difference is that characters get to add a stat bonus to their BAB to overcome AC. The CL check to overcome SR is just CL + 1d20. You can get feats that give you very small bonuses... and that's it. The fighter going up against the Terrasque needs a special weapon, sure, but hitting the thing is a lot easier when he gets to add +8 or more from strength to his BAB.
Now, I can't find stats for the Terrasque in the PRD, so I looked for CR 30's and got Pazazu or Cthul..., with an AC of 48 or 49 & an SR of 41. Is SR is always lower than AC to compensate?
Drahliana Moonrunner |
I currently haven't had to deal with much about Spell Resistance, though in the higher levels, i'm seeing it appear more. My question is, would it break some monsters or mechanics if I removed Spell Resistance altogether?
Doing this makes casters more powerful, so you need to ask yourself... why.
Plausible Pseudonym |
Now, I can't find stats for the Terrasque in the PRD, so I looked for CR 30's and got Pazazu or Cthul..., with an AC of 48 or 49 & an SR of 41. Is SR is always lower than AC to compensate?
SR standard formula for monsters is CR +11. So an even level caster has a 50% chance of effecting it without Spell Penetration, Penetrating Spell, or Dweomer's Essence (500 gp for a one time +5 on a SR check, 250 gp if you craft it), to name the three most common boosters. There are more.
Azothath |
Some creatures are just resistant to magic that they don't want affecting them, Spell Resistance models that. Yes it's a bit simple.
I wouldn't ditch it. It almost exclusively targets magic users and powers from magic items.
If anything you could add Spell Level into the equation which would also pump caster level to overcome SR; 1d20+ SplLvl + CstrLvl >= SR.
bitter lily |
Special senses and resistances to certain energy types are common in creatures of CR 5 and lower. Damage reduction, energy immunities, and regeneration are more common in creatures above CR 5. Spell resistance and immunities become more common above CR 10. As a general rule a creature's spell resitance should equal its CR + 11.
(I hate it when a publisher doesn't copy-edit sufficiently... With how many chances to fix "spell resitance" now?)
According to a table in the Bestiary, AC is CR+11 at CR 1, and scales to be CR+14 at CR 10 and CR+18 at CR 30. So apparently, yes, they did take an increasing STR into account. Nonetheless, I like the idea of adding the spell level into the equation -- likely, from taking a feat, not as a bonus casters would get natively. It just feels better to be able to do something effective to improve one's chances.
If you really like casters (and lots of people will tell you they don't need any help), you could rewrite Spell Penetration to boost CL checks for beating SR by adding the spell level (minimum 1). Of course, if you do this, you might have to eliminate Greater Spell Penetration.
Alternatively, if you like casters but think they should work for their meals, you could keep Spell Penetration as is (CL +2 for beating SR) and rewrite Greater Spell Penetration to boost CL checks for beating SR by adding the spell level (minimum 2), but not stackable with Spell Penetration's +2.
I'm especially interested to hear what experienced people think of the second option. For instance, I'm running a game with all casters: a druid, a bladebound magus, a hunter, a life oracle, & a heavens shaman. However, none of them are wizards with tons of bonus feats. Will rewriting Greater Spell Penetration break my game?
While I couldn't find feats that were any more generous in boosting a fighter's attacks, fighters get an awful lot of bonus feats. Plus, if they fail to penetrate AC, they lose an attack, but not a seriously limited resource like a spell slot.
As a player, I have a 10th-level sorceress, who is currently trying to get past SR 21 with primarily 3rd- to 5th-level spells. With a rewritten GSP, she'd roll 1d20+15 (often +13) vs. SR 21. Surely, that isn't game-breaking! A 5 or less (7 w/ Fireball) still loses the turn -- and the spell slot. By the time she's facing the likes of Pazazu (CR 41), she'll presumably be CL 20 & have 9th-level spells. Even so, 1d20+29 fails on an 11! The RAW 1d20+20... just fails.
Perhaps a simpler remedy would be to change the rule to say that if a caster fails to penetrate spell resistance, they don't lose the spell.
Is that better or worse than the rewritten Greater Spell Penetration?
bitter lily |
SR standard formula for monsters is CR +11. So an even level caster has a 50% chance of effecting it without Spell Penetration, Penetrating Spell, or Dweomer's Essence (500 gp for a one time +5 on a SR check, 250 gp if you craft it), to name the three most common boosters. There are more.
Dweomer's Essence??? Where do I find that?
Added: The second feat is actually Piercing Spell, which gives a decent +5 bonus for only a 1-level boost to spell level. In fact, it actually lowers SR by 5 for that CL check, and I think I've seen arguments here that if you're lucky enough to run up against a creature with SR of 5 or less, that would eliminate it, saving you the roll. Against a standard CR 10 or higher monster, it's "just" effectively a +5 bonus. Needless to say, the feat, or at least the rod, is on my wish list!
Debnor |
If you really think casters need a bonus (most opponents don't even have an 'AC' against spells), and your argument is that physical combat characters get a stat bonus, then it would seem to make sense that the bonus to give would be for the casting stat.
Of course, if you did that, you should also scale base SR like AC does, as well.
And as for going up against Pazazu, well, if you're going up against a freaking Demon Prince, you darn well better have some extra tricks up your sleeve. Or, just make sure that you have an adequate variety of spells that don't take spell resistance.
And wizards don't get 'tons' of bonus feats. They get four, of which one comes at 20th level.
Azothath |
as this is homebrew...
Spell Penetration: add Spell Level to the caster check. So (Spl Lvl 0)+0 to (9)+9.
Greater Spell Penetration: add RndDown(1.5*(Spell Level+1)) to caster check (bonuses do not stack). Bonus runs (Spl Lvl 0)+1 to (9)+15.
check Sure Casting first level spell which adds a flat +5 to the next casting, why spend 500gp for Dweomer's Essence unless you need another +5?
Personally I think a component of the same type needs to be added to Sure Casting to limit its effectiveness (you need a bit of fey to lower a target fey's SR).
At this point in the game there are a decent number of SR:no spells that arcane casters can do some significant damage without any feats that affect SR.
Plausible Pseudonym |
Plausible Pseudonym wrote:SR standard formula for monsters is CR +11. So an even level caster has a 50% chance of effecting it without Spell Penetration, Penetrating Spell, or Dweomer's Essence (500 gp for a one time +5 on a SR check, 250 gp if you craft it), to name the three most common boosters. There are more.Dweomer's Essence??? Where do I find that?
It's the first Google search result. Original source is the PFS Field Guide.
bitter lily |
If you really think casters need a bonus (most opponents don't even have an 'AC' against spells), and your argument is that physical combat characters get a stat bonus, then it would seem to make sense that the bonus to give would be for the casting stat.
Of course, if you did that, you should also scale base SR like AC does, as well.
And as for going up against Pazazu, well, if you're going up against a freaking Demon Prince, you darn well better have some extra tricks up your sleeve. Or, just make sure that you have an adequate variety of spells that don't take spell resistance.
As for tackling a demon prince, well yes. Thank you for IRL showing me the stats for a Tarrasque. It's scary, but at a low enough CR that I fully expect our ambitious GM to actually pitch an APL 21 party (of 6 20th level, non-epic characters) against one some day. RAW, my character would have only a CL 20 vs. its SR 36. W/ your (I fear facetious) suggestion in place, I'd likely have CL 20+9 vs. SR 40. I might maybe make the first; I have a solid 50% chance of making the second. And remember, if I fail, I lose a good spell slot.
SR is something to beware of as we level up! It is not just AC for casters. It's nastier.
As for spells that don't take SR, well, that is in fact one way that casters are better off than martials. We have the option. Those spells generally don't do as much damage, or sometimes impose a penalty other than damage at all. But they're clearly a necessary part of a caster's arsenal! A lesson I've just learned now at 10th level. (Apparently, at about the right time...)
So, Brad, to turn around and actually be helpful: yes, these spells exist, and you should pay attention to the SR entry in each spell's stat block as you select them.
And wizards don't get 'tons' of bonus feats. They get four, of which one comes at 20th level.
That's still one more feat than I'm used to, and with a whole lot more flexibility to boot. (Sorcerers get their last one at 19th, and have to pick from a bloodline-specific list.) I've been trying to avoid the Arcane bloodline (I overdid it), but there are only two bloodlines that offer more than two feats that directly benefit a ranged caster: Arcane and Fey. (If only I could find a reason to try Fey...) My current sorceress, who picked a more flavorful bloodline, will have to make do with at least one feat that may be helpful, but isn't crucial.
Simply put, for all I know, wizards routinely pick up Spell Penetration & Greater SP. I don't think most sorcerers can afford it, given the niggling benefits. They might feel it worth two feat slots if the GSP got rewritten. But maybe that would make wizards swarm all over it, where they don't now. Maybe no caster could afford to go without it. I'm hoping to hear...
bitter lily |
as this is homebrew...
Spell Penetration: add Spell Level to the caster check. So (Spl Lvl 0)+0 to (9)+9.
Greater Spell Penetration: add RndDown(1.5*(Spell Level+1)) to caster check (bonuses do not stack). Bonus runs (Spl Lvl 0)+1 to (9)+15.
If you didn't think my suggestion was generous enough -- or want a bigger spread. (Mine was a flat +2 for the first feat and +2 to +9 for the second. By the time you can get it, you'll almost certainly be casting 2nd level or higher spells, anyway.)
check Sure Casting first level spell which adds a flat +5 to the next casting, why spend 500gp for Dweomer's Essence unless you need another +5?
Personally I think a component of the same type needs to be added to Sure Casting to limit its effectiveness (you need a bit of fey to lower a target fey's SR).
Thanks! Unfortunately, neither that nor Dweomer's Essence comes from a source on the PRD, so it's not available to me. <sniffle> I hope they'll help Brad.
At this point in the game there are a decent number of SR:no spells that arcane casters can do some significant damage without any feats that affect SR.
Yes, and I agree: it's important to have them available!
Drahliana Moonrunner |
Simply put, for all I know, wizards routinely pick up Spell Penetration & Greater SP. I don't think most sorcerers can afford it, given the niggling benefits. They might feel it worth two feat slots if the GSP got rewritten. But maybe that would make wizards swarm all over it, where they don't now. Maybe no caster could afford to go without it. I'm hoping to hear...
No, not all wizards. Not all wizards are trying to take the fighter's role as direct damage dealers. Others are summoners, buffers, or game board changers.
Azothath |
some spells with SR:no
1: Gravity Bow, Grease, Snowball.
2: Acid Arrow, Create Pit, Curse Terrain, (Dust of Twilight), Garden of Peril, (Glitterdust), Stone Call, Summon Swarm, TK Volley.
3: Aqueous Orb, Eruptive Pustules, Ice Spears, Pellet Blast, Spiked Pit, Swarm of Fangs, Trial of Fire and Acid.
4: Acid Pit, Black Tentacles, Curse Terrain, Firefall, Obsidian Flow, Shadow Barbs(weapon), Strangling Hair.
5: Caustic Blood, Cloudkill, Hungry Earth, Faithful Hound, Flesh Wall, Geyser, Trans Rock to Mud, Wall of Stone, Wreath of Blades.
6: Acid Fog, Roaming Pit, Sonic Form (tch atk), Tar Pool.
7:
8:
9: Clashing Rocks.
bitter lily |
In the spirit of helping the OP, there are also some Wondrous Items that can increase CL:
Shifter's Headband (headband, +1 for polymorph spells)
Blazing Robe (body, +1 for fire spells)
Shocking Robe (body, +1 for electricity spells)
Voidfrost Robe (body, +1 for cold spells)
Robe of the Archmagi -- grab it if you can afford it! (body, +2 CL vs. SR for all spells & lots else)
Resplendent Robe of the Thespian -- same thing for bards
Bards can also consider the Pipes of Dissolution (slotless, AoE +2 CL vs. SR)
Otherworldly Kimono - fabulous if you can bear to wear it (body, +4 to all saves and all CL, period, increasing to +6 if you've captured someone inside it -- that's why my PC would have to turn it down)
Quick add: Orange Ioun Stone (slotless, +1 for all spells)
Also, did I mention that I'm putting together my own shopping list? :)
bitter lily |
some spells with SR:no
1: Gravity Bow, Grease, Snowball.
2: Acid Arrow, Create Pit, Curse Terrain, (Dust of Twilight), Garden of Peril, (Glitterdust), Stone Call, Summon Swarm, TK Volley.
3: Aqueous Orb, Eruptive Pustules, Ice Spears, Pellet Blast, Spiked Pit, Swarm of Fangs, Trial of Fire and Acid.
4: Acid Pit, Black Tentacles, Curse Terrain, Firefall, Obsidian Flow, Shadow Barbs(weapon), Strangling Hair.
5: Caustic Blood, Cloudkill, Hungry Earth, Faithful Hound, Flesh Wall, Geyser, Trans Rock to Mud, Wall of Stone, Wreath of Blades.
6: Acid Fog, Roaming Pit, Sonic Form (tch atk), Tar Pool.
7:
8:
9: Clashing Rocks.
Thanks! I've been putting together a list of spells to consider at my next level-up, and this will help immensely.
My big complaint in looking over the list is with all the "It might get your friends too" spells. I've taken Selective Spell to keep them out of a Fireball or equivalent, but it won't help against a Spiked Pit or Black Tentacles if the enemy moves such that we want to cross the area. And some of those spells may be dismissable, but I know Cloudkill for instance is not. (And it's especially dangerous because it moves!) Yes, a "gameboard-changer" would love these spells, but someone who just can't think that way is scared of them. It may become an unavoidable danger...
Orfamay Quest |
My big complaint in looking over the list is with all the "It might get your friends too" spells. I've taken Selective Spell to keep them out of a Fireball or equivalent, but it won't help against a Spiked Pit or Black Tentacles if the enemy moves such that we want to cross the area. And some of those spells may be dismissable, but I know Cloudkill for instance is not. (And it's especially dangerous because it moves!) Yes, a "gameboard-changer" would love these spells, but someone who just can't think that way is scared of them. It may become an unavoidable danger...
Well, the alternative is a rather boring "I win" button. Playing a caster is to some extent a challenge to the player's skill, because there are no obviously superior-to-everything spells, and therefore, a good caster-player needs to be able to select the right spell for the right situation. (Similarly, if there were a one-handed finessable weapon that did B, P, and S damage with a 2d8 base damage and 18-20/x4 critical, every martial would take it, because it's simply superior to everything else in the game.)
bitter lily |
bitter lily wrote:My big complaint in looking over the list is with all the "It might get your friends too" spells. I've taken Selective Spell to keep them out of a Fireball or equivalent, but it won't help against a Spiked Pit or Black Tentacles if the enemy moves such that we want to cross the area. And some of those spells may be dismissable, but I know Cloudkill for instance is not. (And it's especially dangerous because it moves!) Yes, a "gameboard-changer" would love these spells, but someone who just can't think that way is scared of them. It may become an unavoidable danger...Well, the alternative is a rather boring "I win" button. Playing a caster is to some extent a challenge to the player's skill, because there are no obviously superior-to-everything spells, and therefore, a good caster-player needs to be able to select the right spell for the right situation. (Similarly, if there were a one-handed finessable weapon that did B, P, and S damage with a 2d8 base damage and 18-20/x4 critical, every martial would take it, because it's simply superior to everything else in the game.)
I don't want a "I win" button. I like having -- and needing -- a goodly variety of "arrows" in my quiver. But I'm just plain not a gameboard-changer; I've seen one at work, and he was awesome. If the situation calls for a Hungry Pit in exactly those four squares right there... He'd see it, but I'm not likely to. If I were able to place those spells so that the enemy might get hurt & the good guys wouldn't, I wouldn't be ranting, or looking at variant rules. My point is that just making such spells dismissable once I realized what a horrible mistake I had made would help a great deal. (And I just checked: no, the Pit line is not.)
BTW, I'm no good at chess or go, either.
Oh, one more thing for the "It's just AC for casters" argument:
Fighters don't just have BAB & STR bonus; they also get enhancements to their weapons to overcome AC. In short, my math above was off.
A fighter can apparently expect a +2 weapon by 10th level, so would likely have 10+7+2=19 vs. AC 24. I've got CL 10 vs. SR 21.
At 20th, up against that Tarrasque, a fighter has 20+9+5=34 vs. AC 40. I've got 20 vs. SR 36. Spending two feats on +4 and getting +3 from wondrous items does not make up the difference!
Diachronos |
Oh, one more thing for the "It's just AC for casters" argument:
Fighters don't just have BAB & STR bonus; they also get enhancements to their weapons to overcome AC. In short, my math above was off.A fighter can apparently expect a +2 weapon by 10th level, so would likely have 10+7+2=19 vs. AC 24. I've got CL 10 vs. SR 21.
At 20th, up against that Tarrasque, a fighter has 20+9+5=34 vs. AC 40. I've got 20 vs. SR 36. Spending two feats on +4 and getting +3 from wondrous items does not make up the difference!
The issue with comparing "martial hitting AC" to "caster bypassing SR" is that you can't always compare the two.
If a martial character beats their target's AC, they deal damage. Outside of situational abilities or special weapon/attack effects, they're [b]only/[b] going to deal damage. And depending on their weapon and target, they might end up doing an insignificant amount if it can't bypass DR or other defensive abilities.
If a caster bypasses their target's SR, there are a ton of things that could happen: dealing damage (most likely more damage than the martial character), severely crippling their stats, punting them onto another plane of existence, turning them into an ally, etc.
There are fewer ways to increase your chances of getting past SR because the results are much more significant when you succeed.
Plausible Pseudonym |
Right, at high levels your "I win" spell options can trivialize high CR enemies. Greater Possession, Plane Shift, Euphoric Tranquility, etc. Its not hard to super boost your DCs to get an 80%+ chance of success. It is hard to boost both DCs and youR ability to overcome SR.
The martial gets to consistently put out damage that will eventually kill the enemy. At high levels you can support him or try a contingent shot at winning with one spell. Each approach has different risks.
Orfamay Quest |
Oh, one more thing for the "It's just AC for casters" argument:
Fighters don't just have BAB & STR bonus; they also get enhancements to their weapons to overcome AC. In short, my math above was off.A fighter can apparently expect a +2 weapon by 10th level, so would likely have 10+7+2=19 vs. AC 24. I've got CL 10 vs. SR 21.
At 20th, up against that Tarrasque, a fighter has 20+9+5=34 vs. AC 40. I've got 20 vs. SR 36. Spending two feats on +4 and getting +3 from wondrous items does not make up the difference!
The balance issues are a little different. The fighter is balanced, not against her highest attack, but against the middle of her iteratives. Against the Tarrasque, the 20th level fighter is expected to be able to hit with her primary attack, but her third of four will be at +24 vs AC 40. Our 10th level fighter has a +14 vs AC 24 for her second attack which is pretty close to your CL 10 vs SR 21.
The other thing is that, as you point out, it's very easy for the fighter to raise her attack bonus, but it's equally easy for her opponent to raise her own AC (for example, by fighting defensively, by using cover/concealment, or using a special ability) or to debuff the fighter (for example, via an Intimidate check). I don't know any way for a monster to raise its SR or lower an opponent's caster level offhand.
Tarik Blackhands |
Off hand I think the only way you can conceivably get better SR is by slamming the caster de jour with a negative level or several and even then it's kinda in a grey area since CL checks aren't mentioned in the list of checks penalized but it does say creatures are treated as one level lower for level dependent variables (casting mentioned specifically) which could include CL. Maybe. I honestly don't know.
Azothath |
The OP suggested removing SR from the game.
Scaling SR upwards via feats is not so drastic and could be considered balanced by some.
If you feel things are very balanced then you can leave things as is or modify Spell Penetration feats and revisit SRs on creatures and tweak it upwards as needed.
On the SR 35, a 10th level Wiz with INT:20 with both modified feats is running a caster level check of +13(1st) to +19(5th) which still puts him at 100 to 75% fail to affect rate.
Historically when I fought a tarrasque as a wizard I did it from the inside out. Much easier.