Can't wait for weeks to get started on Pathfinder's spells section. It is just too important. Class feature balance, High-level play, and the vast majority of abuses are all problems whose correction depends on a methodical reworking of the 3.5 Spell list.
Let's have a general discussion thread with the following ground rules:
- Only discuss individual spells, or the organization of the existing system, no alternative magic systems. "Spell x should be x level" is okay. "Magic should be a Spellcraft roll" not okay (though I am a fan of such systems).
- Read the SRD version and the Pathfinder Beta version of any spell you refer to, before you post.
- Arcane Schools, Bloodlines, and Domains are fair game.
- Politely correct anyone who misses details, but we're all human. This stuff is really complicated. Please be friendly.
For starters, here are some issues important to me as a player and GM:
Lesser points under the spoiler:
Spells with similar rules ought to be listed together somehow. Cross-referencing a spell like Acid Fog is a huge pain. (I think detailed subschools are a potential solution). Even if it's "Fog, Solid. Fog, Acid. Etc"
Summon spells and the like should have the templated creatures at the ready. When I look up a spell, I want everything I need right in front of me, or (at worst) in the glossary.
Personal pet peeve: Transmutation shouldn't be the "catch all" school. I personally feel that Transmutation spells should, well, transmute things. If you're not turning one thing into another, it should be another school. Also, the largest school of magic in the book needs more description than the one line it gets in the SRD.
Take the guesswork out of assigning spells to levels. After 30+ years of fantasy gaming, I think we can safely quantify the library of spell effects with a great big table in the magic section. We did it for magic item creation! I'd like to see a table that spells it out: "Spell does xdx damage of x type? x Level. Spell grants x type of abstract ability? x level." etc. More importantly: "Spell does effect a (b level) and effect x (y level) = z level".
That last one's a big issue with a lot of folks. Where do we start on that?
I agree: Spells are pretty darn important. However, I respectfully disagree that the game is balanced on spells. I would go as far to say that everything balances on the actual core rules: BAB versus AC discrepancy; Saves versus DC variance; Iterative attacks; etc.
These things are more important, if we're talking about actual balance.
In fact, of all the topics I would give credit to being unbalanced, I believe spells should have the most leeway in terms of power variable.
To each their own. :)
|
Take the guesswork out of assigning spells to levels. After 30+ years of fantasy gaming, I think we can safely quantify the library of spell effects with a great big table in the magic section. We did it for magic item creation! I'd like to see a table that spells it out: "Spell does xdx damage of x type? x Level. Spell grants x type of abstract ability? x level." etc. More importantly: "Spell does effect a (b level) and effect x (y level) = z level".
That last one's a big issue with a lot of folks. Where do we start on that?
Polar Ray should be 3rd level. It has higher potential damage than Fireball or Lightning Bolt, but affects a smaller area / less targets, so I think it balances just right for 3rd level.
Magic Missile should probably do only 1d4 damage per missile, not 1d4+1. It's a sacred cow, but the spell has been 'too good' for too long, IMO. (Or use the 4E solution and have it require a ranged touch attack to hit, but do 1d6?) It's exception-based design, and I don't like that. [waves cane threateningly] A spell should do dice of damage, not dice+1 of damage.
Gate, Summon, Planar Ally, Planar Binding, etc. Creatures called or summoned can't use abilities that replicate spells that cost money or experience, even if, as spell-like abilities, they wouldn't cost the creature money or experience anyway. They also can't summon yet more creatures, or create spawn. [I'd rather that these particular creature powers didn't exist anyway, but fixing them at the spell-level is at least bailing some of the water, even if it doesn't patch the hole and prevent charmed / rebuked / friendly / allied creatures from abusing these abilities willy-nilly.]
Spells that create walls create walls. If the wall of iron or stone is broken down or reshaped, the fragments disintegrate within an hour. Optionally, created material remains magical, and can be dispelled. 'Instantaneous' no longer means 'non-magical and un-dispellable.' (The former would be a fix to the specific spells, the latter would be a fix to the Creation / Instantaneous categories in the magic chapter, which are the root of the problem, IMO.)
Created Water lasts one hour, if not consumed or 'used' (to water a garden, for instance). This applies whether the water came from the Create Water cantrip, meltwater from a Wall of Ice, the remnants of a Sleet Storm or a Decanter of Endless Water.
All cantrips function for a set duration and produce a set effect. None are level-based. Create Water creates two gallons of water, regardless of caster level. Prestidigitation lasts one hour, regardless of caster level.
The Acid created by Acid Splash lasts until the end of the round, then dissipates. Hundreds of gallons of it cannot be saved in ceramic tubs for metal-etching, ore-reduction, stone-carving, paper-making or tannery work.
I agree: Spells are pretty darn important. However, I respectfully disagree that the game is balanced on spells. I would go as far to say that everything balances on the actual core rules: BAB versus AC discrepancy; Saves versus DC variance; Iterative attacks; etc.
Oh, yeah, the thread title is a little flashy. Sorry. ;)
Simply put, Spells are class features capable of changing any of the other class features you mention. You're right, it isn't the only thing to worry about. It is the hardest one to correct. If you view the spells themselves as class features of the spellcasting classes, it might be a very bad idea to wait until the spells chapter is up for review in order to balance the classes. All it takes is one imbalanced spell to make a class notorious (Divine Power?)
Set: It seems to me that many of your suggestions would be best handled at the "School" level. A simple subschool for "Walls" would nicely group the rules you mentioned, as would a more broad rule for the properties of conjured substances.
With monsters, we have descriptors like "goblinoid" that can apply in addition to Humanoid or Animal (goblin snake anyone?). We could do the same with [Wall], [Fog], [Ray], and so forth. Making a magic chapter out of spell "tags" would go a long way to helping newbies parse the notoriously difficult spells chapter. However, this might be difficult to reconcile with my earlier complaint about cross-referencing (in the OP). :(
I think the best way to fix spells is to fix schools. Judging from the Polymorph fix, it would seem that Pathfinder's designers are heading that way. I hope they go all the way and give us complete writeups on each school, instead of the nonsense in the SRD.
Does someone exceptionally knowledgeable want to step up and lay some guidelines for the 18 (9 arcane, 9 divine) spell levels? ...or suggest another way to make this master spell table?
Magic Missile is not 'too good'. The only reason it is useful at all is because incorporeal creatures exist, and are resistant/immune to almost everything that is not a force effect. Yes, it always hits... that's the only other thing it has going for it. Even the other damage spells do more damage (but don't always work) so it's there to provide a weak but reliable option. By the time it's even worth casting, almost everything is hit with a ray at least 75% of the time that you care about so even that much is dubious.
Making it require a to hit roll is the same as deleting it from the game as it will make it a waste of ink and paper that is not worth considering. Making its damage roughly 30% lower (3.5 > 2.5) when direct damage is already too low turns it from niche use to worthless. Making it 1d6 keeps the same average damage, but goes against the theme of reliability as 2-5 is more reliable than 1-6.
A rational opinion differing from Set's.
Magic Missile stays or goes according to the judgement of the designers. This, and a few other spells are sort of "untouchable" and are the source of much disagreement.
May I respectfully request we do not discuss that spell exclusively? Or at least, please explain where it "fits" in your opinion, into the bigger picture of the 9 levels? What makes it a "fair" first level spell in comparison to others at that level, and how might we generalize that to guidelines for new spells, or balancing older ones?
EDIT: BTW, has anyone else noticed that as long as spell names and levels remain the same, then no matter what they do to nerf or improve the spells, the goal of reverse compatibility is technically met? Meaning I can pick up any existing caster stat block and run that character off the new spell list? In light of this fact, perhaps we should aim at discussing spells in terms of "What would it take to make polar ray worth an 8th level spell slot?" instead of "polar ray is worth a 3rd level slot"... even if I agree with Set's assessment above, we keep the existing stat blocks happy by keeping Spell Names and Levels as they are... and changing anything else.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Created Water lasts one hour, if not consumed or 'used' (to water a garden, for instance). This applies whether the water came from the Create Water cantrip, meltwater from a Wall of Ice, the remnants of a Sleet Storm or a Decanter of Endless Water.
I see the pattern you're proposing - that magic can't make permanent "stuff" that can be sold, but I think including water in the group would lead to more problems than it's worth. For one thing, the oasis formed by a decanter of endless water is a staple at this point, and this change wouldn't really let that work. In addition, magical water should, IMO, be able to be stored at least 24 hours, to allow for travel through harsh environments, whether that's due to heat, or on another plane that simply doesn't have potable water. Also, I think that magically dissapearing water on a timer can lead to potential abuse by using it effectively have a 1 hour timer delay on a trap.
Step 1: create water
Step 2: use created water in containers to hold back an avalanche that you've set up (with craft trapmaking or knowledge architecutre & engineering)
Step 3: magic water dissapears, letting piled up rocks, etc. fall down, meanwhile PCs are safely 1 hour away.
This last point applies to any magicallly created material that dissapears on a timer really, but still seems to be a problem that your solution creates.
Perhaps an alternate solution is the magically created material works fine in the form that it was created in, but once you alter it (say by forging a wall of iron into plate mail, it becomes brittle and crumbles, or freezing magically created water into ice causes instability and it goes away, or melted magical ice simply dissapears once it melts, etc.)
A rational opinion differing from Set's.May I respectfully request we do not discuss that spell exclusively?
How about in the interest of brevity everyone limit their comments on any single spell to 1 or 2 posts? I think it's Ok to see differing opinions but if people have lengthy debates about individual spells this thread will be worthless for the rest of the conversation.
Another thought is that perhaps we should first look at what a reasonable expectation for spells of a given level is. If we can agree that certain spells are benchmark spells for a given level then we could examine other spells to see whether they are significantly more or less powerful.
1st level spell "benchmarks"
Magic Missile (though apparently this is debatable)
Sleep (save or disabled with save + 4HD)
Burning Hands (Perhaps a bit weak)
Grease
Mage Armor
Shield
Summon Monster I
Obscuring Mist
Prot from X
1st level ?overpowered?
Enlarge Person
Color Spray (maybe too useful for too long?)
I'll post some more levels later.
Perhaps an alternate solution is the magically created material works fine in the form that it was created in, but once you alter it (say by forging a wall of iron into plate mail, it becomes brittle and crumbles, or freezing magically created water into ice causes instability and it goes away, or melted magical ice simply dissapears once it melts, etc.)
This wording, as it applies to created things of all sorts, seems to be a good candidate for official inclusion.
1 post per spell.
Great idea. Wish I had put it in the OP.
To foster better discussion, please post only once regarding a given spell. Especially magic missile.
...I like to pretend I'm a moderator. :p
I corrected the Magic Missile bit because it was the only mistake that stood out to me. Good benchmarks for level 1? Color Spray and Sleep. Since you only get... 2, maybe 3 spells period, having them be worth casting is critical. These qualify, and as they have low HD caps in place they also quickly become obsolete so that they can't overshadow higher level spells.
Burning Hands is an example of a very underpowered first level spell. As it stands, it might be worth it as a cantrip but even still, you are a character who might survive one hit from something weak going up close to multiple enemies... make it count. 1d4 save for half doesn't qualify as a viable 1st level spell.
Magic Missile is a bit on the underpowered side. At level 1, a crossbow bolt is just as good (and usable at least 10/day instead of 2/day). It does scale a little, but it's still inferior or equal to other DD for all purposes save zapping a ghost. A simple 1d4+2 might be enough to help it keep up. Then it's an auto hitting crossbow bolt at least.
Stuff like Mage Armor and Shield are solid staples in that they provide a level appropriate effect, but stay useful later on. Grease is in here as well. So is Enlarge Person. Helping the melees in a meaningful way is always nice.
Stuff like Mage Armor and Shield are solid staples in that they provide a level appropriate effect, but stay useful later on. Grease is in here as well. So is Enlarge Person. Helping the melees in a meaningful way is always nice.
How long a spell "stays useful" is definitely a consideration.
To balance the existing spell names vs. current levels, it might be necessary to account for scaling. A spell like Mage Armor stays useful, a spell like Sleep doesn't.
Is it a given that certain 1st level spells must become obsolete? I never cared much for ceiling effects on spells, myself. I feel that all spells should stay useful, and Spell Level should determine the general power of the concept (putting someone to sleep is low level, killing instantly is high level... jumping is low level, flying is higher level, etc).
Of course, go down this road too far, and you get 4e. Let's not forget our roots... but is is sort of silly to shrink the pool of useful spells for higher level mages that have more spell slots. We've all ended up doubling or tripling up on Grease, right? (no SR!)
Well, having some become obsolete is necessary in this case. At very low levels, the Wizard can't even cast 1 spell a fight (cantrips don't count). Sleep and Color Spray end encounters. If they didn't cap out fast, they'd be too good as they'd do everything the better save or sucks did, except sooner.
Having others stay useful such as MA, Shield, and Grease gives him some options that aren't outdated.
The higher level spells aren't as easily replaced. HD caps are only employed at low levels for the most part.
Well, having some become obsolete is necessary in this case. At very low levels, the Wizard can't even cast 1 spell a fight (cantrips don't count). Sleep and Color Spray end encounters. If they didn't cap out fast, they'd be too good as they'd do everything the better save or sucks did, except sooner.
Well Color spray does not have a HD cap, its effect is limited to stunning higher level creatures but that can be quite powerful. This is why I suggested it might be overpowered.
Well, having some become obsolete is necessary in this case. At very low levels, the Wizard can't even cast 1 spell a fight (cantrips don't count). Sleep and Color Spray end encounters. If they didn't cap out fast, they'd be too good as they'd do everything the better save or sucks did, except sooner.
Having others stay useful such as MA, Shield, and Grease gives him some options that aren't outdated. "End encounters" may actually be the best measure of what needs capping. Could see that on the Big Spell Effect Chart some day.
The higher level spells aren't as easily replaced. HD caps are only employed at low levels for the most part.
What I'm taking from this is that ceiling effects are a necessary evil? I can accept that. Would you mind explaining a little more for me which situations call for this? "Ends encounters" might be the best measure of these effects. It could be on the Big Spell Effect Chart.
It should be noted that there is a difference between *created* items and *conjured* items. Magically created stuff generally detects as magical, and having it have limited duration is reasonable. Conjured items are pulled from somewhere else, not out of nowhere. Wall of Iron is *conjured*, not *created*. That's a big difference in the implied metaphysics.
I think a beefed up school description could be the best compromise between what Squirreloid is saying ("Created and Conjured are different in the SRD") and what Set is saying ("The SRD distinction falls short of controlling a few abuses"). I would rejoice if Pathfinder moved one step away from 'implied metaphysics' (great term, BTW) and into 'functional metaphysics', or literally a top-level definition at the start of the magic chapter: what each school can and cannot do.
Anything with 5 or more HD is stunned for 1 round if they fail the save. Problem: This means you're practically right in front of something with 5 or more HD. If it works, you use your round's actions to take out their round's actions. If it does not work, you have wasted your action and are now in a bad position. Potentially worth the risk for an auto win (unconscious, blind, stun) when you have little choice anyways. Not worth it at higher levels (especially since without Heighten it still has the low first level spell DCs and with it... cast something better with your slot).
Now, let's look at level 2 spells.
Scorching Ray is actually fairly decent. Even though it is direct damage, it does always work if it hits. It's actually better than Fireball for this reason alone. This is because Fireball is too weak now that 88 HP enemies are low-mid level and not representative of uber dragons and demon lords aka the pinnacle of enemies. Fireball still does the same damage it always did.
Glitterdust effectively kills enemies for 1 round/level. It's better than Sleep because if Sleep only hits half the enemy, the other half could just wake them up. Sure, you've just make the entire enemy force waste a round, but it's not an effective save or die anymore. It cannot be neutralized as easily, and does not have a hard HD cap (though the save DC mechanic again ensures it will eventually be replaced). Small AoE means it won't hit too many enemies (and since you're less likely to be fighting small enemies such as Kobolds and Goblins, AoEs are less effective). It represents the highest end of 2nd level spells.
An example of an overpowered 2nd level spell is Ray of Stupidity (not core). Instant kill for any animal. Period. No save. Well actually you just put it in a coma, but you can CdG at your leisure... or just leave it alone. Also affects some of the lower Intelligence enemies the same way. At higher levels, metamagic away and it can easily start to be a 'no save, you die' for stuff with higher intelligence (say, 6-14). It wouldn't have this sort of effect if it were capped at 1, just like Ray of Enfeeblement. Course, there's not a whole lot the party fighter or whatever can do with Int 1 either...
What would it take to make Fireball worth a third level (arcane) spell slot?
Are these old benchmark spells underpowered? What's really going on here?
I have personally seen fireball used to great effectiveness in 3e. Is it sheer comparison that makes fireball "too weak", or have a majority of players turned their back on the spell because it's not filling it's role anymore?
|
|
that magic can't make permanent "stuff" that can be sold, but I think including water in the group would lead to more problems than it's worth. For one thing, the oasis formed by a decanter of endless water is a staple at this point, and this change wouldn't really let that work.
A 'planar connection to the elemental plane of blah' is just as capable of fulfilling this, and has been used to explain storms (plane of air), superhot areas (plane of fire) and watery areas (most prominently that ever-expanding swamp in Halrua). If the decanter-oasis thing is wanted as a one-time dealie, there could be *one* decanter that is awesome and creates permanant water, while the ones that any Wizard can pump out only create temporary water.
In addition, magical water should, IMO, be able to be stored at least 24 hours, to allow for travel through harsh environments, whether that's due to heat, or on another plane that simply doesn't have potable water. Also, I think that magically dissapearing water on a timer can lead to potential abuse by using it effectively have a 1 hour timer delay on a trap.
24 hours is fine. Forever is what is problematic, IMO.
As for the trap thing, I think that falls under 'clever use of magic,' and should be encouraged, not discouraged. There are other ways that the players could rig a trap to go off later (have the familiar sit there on the trigger, and not just having it go off an hour later, perhaps too early or too late to be effective, but go off when it's most useful!).
Having Instantaneous / Conjuration (creation) stuff not be permanent, with a few specific exceptions (some types of Minor and Major Creation, for instance, a spell specifically *intended* to make permanant stuff, unlike Acid Splash or Wall of Iron, which were not intended to make permanant stuff), would be the ideal solution, IMO.
|
|
In light of this fact, perhaps we should aim at discussing spells in terms of "What would it take to make polar ray worth an 8th level spell slot?" instead of "polar ray is worth a 3rd level slot"...
In which case, Polar Ray should function more like Scorching Ray, with multiple beams, which must be fired at different targets *or*, much more fun, allow the caster to produce one of these beams a round for 1 round / level (perhaps with some sort of caveat that if used on an individual creature in consecutive rounds, damage is halved, limiting the ability to just nuke one target over and over and splitting up the potential damage of the spell a bit by encouraging multiple targets to be selected in consecutive rounds, 'cause, uh, the icy coating created by the first hit insulates them against another hit, but breaks away over a round, so that it's more effective if you zap someone every *other* round, and find some other target for the interim rounds).
Pew, pew! Lazors! Uh, lazors of ICE!
Given the scary, scary nature of Meteor Swarm, Time Stop, Gate, etc. at 9th level, a Polar Ray(s) spell that allowed multiple rays over time (like Produce Flame, all hopped up on goofballs) might be suitable for an 8th level 'nuke.'
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Take the guesswork out of assigning spells to levels. After 30+ years of fantasy gaming, I think we can safely quantify the library of spell effects with a great big table in the magic section. We did it for magic item creation! I'd like to see a table that spells it out: "Spell does xdx damage of x type? x Level. Spell grants x type of abstract ability? x level." etc. More importantly: "Spell does effect a (b level) and effect x (y level) = z level".
That last one's a big issue with a lot of folks. Where do we start on that?
Polar Ray should be 3rd level. It has higher potential damage than Fireball or Lightning Bolt, but affects a smaller area / less targets, so I think it balances just right for 3rd level.
Magic Missile should probably do only 1d4 damage per missile, not 1d4+1. It's a sacred cow, but the spell has been 'too good' for too long, IMO. (Or use the 4E solution and have it require a ranged touch attack to hit, but do 1d6?) It's exception-based design, and I don't like that. [waves cane threateningly] A spell should do dice of damage, not dice+1 of damage.
That was pretty much the Basic D&D version too. Roll to hit, 1d6+1 damage. Come on, there's precedent!
|
|
Another thought is that perhaps we should first look at what a reasonable expectation for spells of a given level is. If we can agree that certain spells are benchmark spells for a given level then we could examine other spells to see whether they are significantly more or less powerful.
1st level spell "benchmarks"
Burning Hands (Perhaps a bit weak)
Summon Monster I
My problem with Burning Hands is that it's too weak *at first level.* It doesn't suck when you're fifth level (having an easy to adjudicate effect) and it would be way cool if you could Metamagic Enlarge it to make a larger cone (which isn't possible in 3.5), but at the earlier levels, it's just sad. Upping it to 1d6 / level, and perhaps modifying the cone size based on level (10 ft. plus 5 ft. for every odd level? So 15 ft. at 3rd, 20 ft. at 5th, 25 ft. at 7th and a max of 30 ft. at 9th?) might be neat.
I'm kinda partial to having most or all spells do at least d6s / level or d6s / two levels or whatever. d4s are sad little ponies. Shoo, ponies, shoo, shoo!
Same sort of issue with Summon Monster I. At first level it's deadwood. Adding just a couple of rounds of duration would, IMO, make it much more viable, IMO.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Anything with 5 or more HD is stunned for 1 round if they fail the save. Problem: This means you're practically right in front of something with 5 or more HD. If it works, you use your round's actions to take out their round's actions. If it does not work, you have wasted your action and are now in a bad position. Potentially worth the risk for an auto win (unconscious, blind, stun) when you have little choice anyways. Not worth it at higher levels (especially since without Heighten it still has the low first level spell DCs and with it... cast something better with your slot).
In my high-level Savage Tide game (just made 19th level), my beguiler PC was using color spray for a long time, at least into double-digit levels. With good enough stats and feats to bump save DCs, it was still useful as a multi-target take-out spell. Stunning just one creature for a round? Not so great - you're just trading your action for theirs. Stun several? Now we have something useful, esp. if you are coordinating with a party rogue/archer for sneak attacks.
Now, let's look at level 2 spells.
Scorching Ray is actually fairly decent. Even though it is direct damage, it does always work if it hits. It's actually better than Fireball for this reason alone. This is because Fireball is too weak now that 88 HP enemies are low-mid level and not representative of uber dragons and demon lords aka the pinnacle of enemies. Fireball still does the same damage it always did.
Therein lies the problem. Fireball was doing d6/level in a 20' radius back when, as you said, 88 HP was way the hell at the high end of of the curve. Now your average CR 5 ragamuffin has that. Add a damage cap (10 dice) and the proliferation of evasion in 3rd Ed, and suddenly fireball is looking pretty weak.
Glitterdust effectively kills enemies for 1 round/level. It's better than Sleep because if Sleep only hits half the enemy, the other half could just wake them up. Sure, you've just make the entire enemy force waste a round, but it's not an effective save or die anymore. It cannot be neutralized as easily, and does not have a hard HD cap (though the save DC mechanic again ensures it will eventually be replaced). Small AoE means it won't hit too many enemies (and since you're less likely to be fighting small enemies such as Kobolds and Goblins, AoEs are less effective). It represents the highest end of 2nd level spells.
GD also keeps its usefulness even at very high levels both as an anti-invisibility nerf and because it ignores SR.
|
|
I agree that summoning spells need a duration boost. Even at mid-levels it is typically a waste of time for a caster to bring in a summoned monster. This is especially true for a sorcerer, or "why would I waste a spell known on THAT?"
I think a duration of 2 rounds/caster level could work, or 1 + 2 rounds/caster level. Not enough to do many things out of combat (4 minutes instead of 2 at 20th level), but makes it a little more worthwhile, especially since you give up a round to summon anyway.
If it works, you use your round's actions to take out their round's actions.
If it works they are stunned which is quite a bit worse than losing an action. Further it works on multiple targets.
Glitterdust effectively kills enemies for 1 round/level.... It represents the highest end of 2nd level spells.
Glitterdust has been quite effectively nerfed down to what I think is a good level for a second level spell. It still disables multiple targets for potentially multiple rounds but the extra save/ round means it's much less likely they will be down for a long time. Probably not the most powerful level 2 spell but still decent.
I agree that summoning spells need a duration boost. Even at mid-levels it is typically a waste of time for a caster to bring in a summoned monster. This is especially true for a sorcerer, or "why would I waste a spell known on THAT?"
People tend to make the mistake of thinking of summons as a form of attack when they are best used as battlefield control. If the enemy is attacking and defending themselves against a summoned Bison (or even dog) then they cannot attack the party. Summoned creatures are also the perfect pair for a rogue so your wizard should be using them as such.
I've always thought that at below 4th level summon monster spells were worthless. After 4th level they sort of come into their own. My thought on Summon Monster 1 or 2 has been that the duration should be changed to "1 round/ level *or* Concentration". Low level casters can use summoned critters in combat as damage sponges while higher level they can set and forget.
|
|
I fully concur Dennis.
Even at 3rd level, bringing in outsiders with DR and Resistance to Energy can prolong a battle as they absorb hits and aid another for the caster or his friends.
The Concentration bit might work. After all, a creature with 12 hit points is not going to last long, and spending standard actions out of combat to keep it around won't "break" the game. Plus, it gives Conjurer NPCs a bit more backup even if they are surprised. The only problem is when do you "stop" the Concentration bit?
Maybe 1 round/level or Concentration up to 1 min/level.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
My suggestion is that any spell that gives the party a free rest (e.g. rope trick, teleport, MMM) should have a costly material component. The 15-minute adventuring day and scry 'n' die would be less favoured if you have to pop 500 or 1,000 gp every time you wanted a nap or teleport in somewhere. From an economic point of view it makes more sense for wizards to actually build towers to live in rather than MMMing, and for the transportation of goods to be by mundane means.
The only concern I have is with Teleport and it's role as a GTFO spell in a tight situation. Perhaps the material component could be a gold ring or something that's always "on hand".
|
|
My suggestion is that any spell that gives the party a free rest (e.g. rope trick, teleport, MMM) should have a costly material component. The 15-minute adventuring day and scry 'n' die would be less favoured if you have to pop 500 or 1,000 gp every time you wanted a nap or teleport in somewhere. From an economic point of view it makes more sense for wizards to actually build towers to live in rather than MMMing, and for the transportation of goods to be by mundane means.
The only concern I have is with Teleport and it's role as a GTFO spell in a tight situation. Perhaps the material component could be a gold ring or something that's always "on hand".
I fully agree.
The component could be something like extraplanar chest, where you keep one part on you (say a 500gp gold ring as a focus) and need a teleportation circle set up somewhere (costing 5000gp). If you teleport to the circle it costs you nothing, if you go elsewhere the ring is consumed as a material component.
My suggestion is that any spell that gives the party a free rest (e.g. rope trick, teleport, MMM) should have a costly material component. The 15-minute adventuring day and scry 'n' die would be less favoured if you have to pop 500 or 1,000 gp every time you wanted a nap or teleport in somewhere. From an economic point of view it makes more sense for wizards to actually build towers to live in rather than MMMing, and for the transportation of goods to be by mundane means.
The only concern I have is with Teleport and it's role as a GTFO spell in a tight situation. Perhaps the material component could be a gold ring or something that's always "on hand".
I like both these suggestions. I've never quite understood the logic behind the selection of which spells had costly spell components but this makes a ton of sense.
The best fix for rope trick might simply be to reduce the duration of the spell. As it's written it's custom tailored for parties as a cheap enabler of the 15 minute adventuring day.
I also like the idea of being able to create permanent teleport circles which are perhaps twice the cost of the individual spell. Then getting TF out is free but getting back in is expensive. You could also set up a series of jump targets... at wizards guilds and big cities and such.
I fully agree.The component could be something like extraplanar chest, where you keep one part on you (say a 500gp gold ring as a focus) and need a teleportation circle set up somewhere (costing 5000gp). If you teleport to the circle it costs you nothing, if you go elsewhere the ring is consumed as a material component.
That sounds like a solid idea.
But I'm gonna bring this back again and again: can we generalize this? So far I've seen two good "balance definitions" in this thread:
- (potentially) ends the encounter
- free rest
There are some obvious other definitions:
- Does xd6 energy damage in y area.
- Touch or ranged ability damage.
- etc
In addition to collecting specific spell fixes, we should endeavor to collect more of these balance definitions so that one day we may be able to look at a Magic Chapter and say "This spell in my favorite old 3rd party product potentially ends the encounter with no HD cap, it should be 6th level minimum." OR "It can stay 2nd level but it needs a level cap."
You see, I'm not too concerned about the Pathfinder Updated SRD spells. I think top priority is to have solid guidelines for creating new spells and taking old spells and fitting them into the new balance. If we can fix a few problem spells on the way , let's do it.
|
I'd like to see some clarification on spells of similar effects and stacking.
Eg all the fog spells. There's been plenty of talk of quite clever stacking of spells to make overpowered encounter enders. Maybe fog effects shouldn't stack. I certainly believe cloud kill shouldn't stack with solid fog for instance. The pure density of solid fog would actually make the less dense cloud kill sit on top (gas law physics). I think others will disagree though as this really nerfs a powerul combo. It may help adress some of the much talked about power gap between mage classes and fighter classes
I also think they need to make it more dangerous to overlap extradimensional spaces. Just as you can't put a portable hole in a bag of holding, I think it should be dangerous to bring these things into places like rope trick etc. This idea needs lots more balancing I realise but its always bugged me to have all these "extra dimensional spaces" stacked within each other. Don't make them exclusive, but do make them risky. Would need to look at the Leomund spells though with this.
I really like the concept of having anything summoned from an extra dimensional plane return to the plane when it falls outside the boundaries set by the original spell (Set mentioned this above I think). We house rule this in my home games. It works for wall spells (as you breake them up they vanish back), works for fighting planar creatures as disarming them makes the weapon vanish. They and all their gear also returns when they are killed on the material plane. We also roll this into effects created by extra dimensional beings and it fixes things like powering up via summoned wish beasts etc. When the creature vanishes, so does any effect it created. This one needs a bit of exploring though as it may break some concepts like planar buildings etc existing on the material plane after that race "disapeared" some time in the past. It works in our home game really well but I'm no where near as knowledgeable on the nuances of the spells as many of the posters here.
What would it take to make Fireball worth a third level (arcane) spell slot?
Are these old benchmark spells underpowered? What's really going on here?
I have personally seen fireball used to great effectiveness in 3e. Is it sheer comparison that makes fireball "too weak", or have a majority of players turned their back on the spell because it's not filling it's role anymore?
It doesn't matter what magic you compare it to. HP of characters have went up considerably. HP of monsters have went up much more.
Back in 1st, or 2nd, whatever Mage casts a Fireball, and chances are he ends the encounter by himself because those xd6s go much further.
3rd, he does the same thing. Enemies take minor to moderate damage, still fight just as well, and now think he is crunchy and would taste good with ketchup. About the only way he's killing with Fireball is if the enemies are near dead anyways (in which case, he's probably dropping it on his own allies who are engaging in melee), the enemies are very weak (in which case he's wasting a spell slot and could just take a smoke break while watching everyone else one hit KO the weak enemies), or he has gone very far out of his way to optimize blasting which makes him an almost fighter like (see lack of caps) one trick pony. And as impressive as it is to say 'Maximized Twinned Admixtured Fireball' a simple crowd control spell would do the same thing while having a much lower chance of causing the DM to smack you with the DMG when you say you just did 120 Fire damage and 120 Acid damage, save DC whatever half.
Cast Haste on a generic Fighter with a greatsword. He's probably doing as much damage as your Fireball. Except he keeps doing that damage for 1 round/level, and you've also hasted the Rogue, Cleric, and whoever else. If you want to do damage, support magic > blasting magic. Crowd control magic > support magic as well. Blind means no dex to AC and an AC penalty after all, which means Mr. Greatsword gets to walk up and take advantage of that lower AC to do more damage, while the enemy can't fight back as well. If you can Haste the party and blind the enemy, even better. But if you have to choose, there you go. This assumes your party is weak. The stronger they are, the more support and CC magic pulls ahead.
As for Color Spray's stun, you can catch multiple enemies in the 15' cone. If they make their save though, guess who they're practically right next to? Huge risk, little reward, and you have better options.
Now if you can Sculpt it, trying to stun up to 4 (or more) enemies at a safe distance is worth considering. But non core examples aren't quite relevant here.
Edit: Forgot something else relevant. Meteor Swarm is not 'scary'. It is an utter joke for a 9th level spell. 'Which one of these is not like the others'. Seriously. If you had Fire resistance 20 (such as from an energy resistance spell by a 7th level casters) the spell does next to nothing to you.
6-36 minus 20 means half the time, it does no fire damage at all even if you fail your save, or it's the touch attack version. Then 2-12 bludgeoning... The super 9th level spell does about... 30, 40 damage to a level 7 character. Yes, totally awe inspiring I know. /sarcasm
It might be worth considering if it were several levels lower, as it's really just a bigger Scorching Ray (also shut down by minor energy resistance, but minor energy resistance is much less relevant at level 3 than level 17). A 6th level spell version of it that was otherwise exactly the same might be worth a spell slot if you care. If it were one big hit instead of multiple small hits (and that big hit was bigger) it might be worth considering.
This blasting spell is one level lower. If it is level 9, it needs to be better than a 20 cap xd6 with a Fortitude for half that can hit as many targets as you want within Long range provided they are within 60 feet of each other. More to the point, you don't need something like Mastery of Shaping to avoid blowing up your own allies, so it's party friendly. You just say 'you guys dry out now' and roll some D6s while the DM rolls some D20s. It even does extra damage against certain types of enemies.
I think fireball IS a good example of a third level spell as is and should not be changed. It's not the most powerful 3rd level spell but personally I don't think direct damage spells should be the most powerful spells of their level. Yes it tapers off in effectiveness fairly quickly... but that doesn't bother me much.
Second Level Benchmark Spells:
- Scorching Ray
- Glitterdust (I like the new version)
- Web --- Overnerfed? Now pretty weak
- Invisibility
- Alter Self -- New version is Ok, mostly utility spell now
- Spider Climb
- Levitation
Bizarro
Rope Trick!!! The lowest level 15 minute adventure day enabler
Overall I think the biggest stinker on this list was Glitterdust and Web, both of which were nerfed... maybe overnerfed? Has anyone really played with the new versions?
Rope Trick needs some serious help, at the very least moved up to third level, maybe moved up to third plus the material component discussed above.
|
|
Rope Trick needs some serious help, at the very least moved up to third level, maybe moved up to third plus the material component discussed above.
I'm kind flabbergasted at how amazingly good Rope Trick is compared to Leomund's Tiny Hut. I'm not sure that Rope Trick really warrants a high spell level, since it's basically just the amazing power to avoid doing wandering encounters while you rest, but Tiny Hut, by comparison, should be 1st level.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I fully concur Dennis.
Even at 3rd level, bringing in outsiders with DR and Resistance to Energy can prolong a battle as they absorb hits and aid another for the caster or his friends.The Concentration bit might work. After all, a creature with 12 hit points is not going to last long, and spending standard actions out of combat to keep it around won't "break" the game. Plus, it gives Conjurer NPCs a bit more backup even if they are surprised. The only problem is when do you "stop" the Concentration bit?
Maybe 1 round/level or Concentration up to 1 min/level.
My suggestion would be a duration of Concentration +1/round per level (max 2 rounds per caster level).
After you stop concentrating the creature remains for 1 round per casster level. So you could cast and not concentrate and it will last for 1 round per level or you could cast and concentrate for the first 2 round then let it loose for 1 round per level.
Seems like a good fix. Also, it fits with the summon swarm precedent.
I'm kind flabbergasted at how amazingly good Rope Trick is compared to Leomund's Tiny Hut. I'm not sure that Rope Trick really warrants a high spell level, since it's basically just the amazing power to avoid doing wandering encounters while you rest, but Tiny Hut, by comparison, should be 1st level.
If someone were to try and create a spell with the following description what level would you assign it.
I want a spell that creates a pocket dimension which lasts for 1 hour per level. Included in the spell is an invisible gate which hovers over the ground and is invisible while I'm in my pocket dimension. While in the pocket dimension nothing outside the dimension can hurt me.
This spell should also enable my entire party to climb up to 30' vertical, bypass walls, and can potentially act as a sniping platform for shooting targets on the ground.
What level should this spell be?
SKR is currently working on his "How to Build Spells" book - if that comes out during the playtest, hopefully it establishes some good guidelines for comparisons.
Thanks for mentioning this, I await it eagerly.
It doesn't matter what magic you compare it to. HP of characters have went up considerably. HP of monsters have went up much more.
Crusader, a lot of those points were good, I'm only nitpicking this first one. I played from 2e as well, but just because the spell is less powerful comparatively now than it was doesn't mean it's not "working" where it is. The rest of the game was balanced against fireball as a benchmark effect. Most of the class designs were built around "at fifth level, the wizard gets fireball."
Is it possible that Fireball was perceived as too powerful in earlier editions, and it's nerfing was an warranted, organic change?
The question ought not be: "is Fireball as powerful as it was in 2e?" We know the answer is no, and that doesn't help much for Pathfinder. The question must be "Is Fireball a good benchmark level 3 spell? Does it do what a wizard should be able to do at 5th character level? If is appropriate for the encounters likely to be faced by an APL 5 party?"
We can't answer that question yet. The spell levels overlap in power, and the benchmark spells are shifting ground. What do Fly and Fireball have in common that makes them 3rd level? The answer here should be: they are both suitable for an ECL 5 encounter. Are they really? I don't know, I'm just raising the questions.
Rope Trick needs some serious help, at the very least moved up to third level, maybe moved up to third plus the material component discussed above.
I'm gonna keep beating this one: Spell levels shouldn't change. Better to nerf or improve the spell than change the level.
Change the level, then you have to change the stat blocks in every published adventure, re-price magic items, rethink spells benchmarked off the changed spell, etc. Change the spell's description or add a caveat, costly component, etc, and it's relatively insular.
I hope to see it assumed in this discussion that spell names and levels are off limits, simply to preserve reverse compatibility.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
3rd, he does the same thing. Enemies take minor to moderate damage, still fight just as well, and now think he is crunchy and would taste good with ketchup. About the only way he's killing with Fireball is if the enemies are near dead anyways (in which case, he's probably dropping it on his own allies who are engaging in melee), the enemies are very weak (in which case he's wasting a spell slot and could just take a smoke break while watching everyone else one hit KO the weak enemies), or he has gone very far out of his way to optimize blasting which makes him an almost fighter like (see lack of caps) one trick pony. And as impressive as it is to say 'Maximized Twinned Admixtured Fireball' a simple crowd control spell would do the same thing while having a much lower chance of causing the DM to smack you with the DMG when you say you just did 120 Fire damage and 120 Acid damage, save DC whatever half.
In our high-level STAP game, fireball and similar spells are probably used most often to clear off swarms and is regularly dropped on party mates, most of whom have evasion anyway.
Besides, 240 points of total damage (which is resistable in two dimensions) for, what a 14th level spell? Whose DC is based on it being a 3rd level spell and which is still Ref half (evasion beats) in a 20' r.
Bleah. Like you said, it's a mouthful to say but not much to write home about.
As for Color Spray's stun, you can catch multiple enemies in the 15' cone. If they make their save though, guess who they're practically right next to? Huge risk, little reward, and you have better options.
Now if you can Sculpt it, trying to stun up to 4 (or more) enemies at a safe distance is worth considering. But non core examples aren't quite relevant here.
Sure, when you're down to your 1st level attack spells at high level, you're running pretty dry. The distinction is that it still has some reward (even if it's little) vs. most other 1st level spells once you get to higher levels. Not great, but not completely and utterly useless, especially if, instead of moving up and casting the spell, you start your turn next to the enemy (invisibly, of course, if you're an illusionist-type), cast the spell, and then tumble away.
Edit: Forgot something else relevant. Meteor Swarm is not 'scary'. It is an utter joke for a 9th level spell. 'Which one of these is not like the others'. Seriously. If you had Fire resistance 20 (such as from an energy resistance spell by a 7th level casters) the spell does next to nothing to you.
6-36 minus 20 means half the time, it does no fire damage at all even if you fail your save, or it's the touch attack version. Then 2-12 bludgeoning... The super 9th level spell does about... 30, 40 damage to a level 7 character. Yes, totally awe inspiring I know. /sarcasm
It might be worth considering if it were several levels lower, as it's really just a bigger Scorching Ray (also shut down by minor energy resistance, but minor energy resistance is much less relevant at level 3 than level 17). A 6th level spell version of it that was otherwise exactly the same might be worth a spell slot if you care. If it were one big hit instead of multiple small hits (and that big hit was bigger) it might be worth considering.
I think that I recall in 1st Ed that meteor swarm did 3 kinds of damage:
1. If you were in the path of the meteor, you got hit by it as it moved through and took damage.
2. If you got hit at the target point, you took damage.
3. When it blew up you took damage.
So, if a meteor swarm did damage as a LINE, a RANGED TOUCH, *and* a BURST (and stipulated that, for the purpose of energy resistance, all damage inflicted by the spell counted as a lump sum, not separate hits), then we would be talking about something.
I think the simple fix I did in my last campaign was basically let you shoot 1 meteor/2 levels at any targets you wanted. No complex patterns/overlaps/etc. Just lock and load and fire away. I kind of like the 1st Edition concept, though. Might be fun, though I suppose a bit complex to implement. Maybe not too bad; say, something like:
Each meteor streaks out to any point within range designated by you in a 5-ft. line. Any creature within this line is struck by the meteor, suffering 2d6 points of bludgeoning damage and 6d6 points of fire damage with no saving throw. When the meteor reaches the point you designate, it explodes in a 40-ft. radius spread for an additional 6d6 points of fire damage. Creatures who are within this spread and within the path of the meteor take 2d6 points of bludgeoning damage and 12d6 points of fire damage from each meteor; apply fire resistance to this total only once per meteor.
For me, I would ditch both rolling to hit (at high level, some monsters really do have good touch ACs) and saving throws (why bother - it's 9th level, screw evasion). Flat out damage, sit there and take it.
You could certainly attach a clause stipulating that each meteor needs to be targeted at a separate square if you want to keep the flavor of a "swarm" of meteors rather than a "stream" of meteors. Still, even if you close-targeted all four on a big creature, you are still talking an average of 196 damage. And a big ol ancient dragon has HOW many hit points? That's what I thought... Still, enough to scare em.
You could play with the dice values - make the line 3d6 bludgeoning and 3d6 fire line/6d6 fire spread if you think 14d6 per meteor is too much. Bump it to 6d6 of each (bludgeon, fire line, fire spread) if you think it's too low.
Still, I think the point is:
If you make it a line/burst you get rid of some of the potential nerfs (you miss a target, or a 4th level spell like ray deflection (SC) makes you IMMUNE to being PUMMELED BY METEORS!), plus amps the damage and gives you a more "spectacular" effect, as the spell states it aims to deliver.
This blasting spell is one level lower. If it is level 9, it needs to be better than a 20 cap xd6 with a Fortitude for half that can hit as many targets as you want within Long range provided they are within 60 feet of each other. More to the point, you don't need something like Mastery of Shaping to avoid blowing up your own allies, so it's party friendly. You just say 'you guys dry out now' and roll some D6s while the DM rolls some D20s. It even does extra damage against certain types of enemies.
It's true. The targetability of the spell = win. Lots of DD spells don't get used cuz the positioning of foes required never works out in your favor. Why blow a spell to only get 1 or 2 bad guys.
Also, at high levels, Fort save = win because it nerfs evasion (yes, Mettle exists in splatbooks, but it is vanishingly rare compared to evasion). At high levels, Ref half spells are almost pointless.
Rope Trick needs some serious help, at the very least moved up to third level, maybe moved up to third plus the material component discussed above.I'm gonna keep nitpicking this one: Spell levels shouldn't change. Better to nerf or improve the spell than change the level.
Change the level, then you have to change the stat blocks in every published adventure, re-price magic items, rethink spells benchmarked off the changed spell, etc. Change the spell's description or add a caveat, costly component, etc, and it's relatively insular.
I'm not sure I agree with this, it would be very difficult to reasonably leave rope trick at second level and keep it even vaguely similar to what it currently does. So it's been proposed to go with an expensive component for rope trick. I can deal with that but I would go even a little bit further and suggest:
The rope must remain anchored to the ground and visible *or* the entrance to the rope trick dimension is conspicuous and can be discovered with a normal spot check *or* both. Even with a conspicuous entrance this is a powerful spell. I would also suggest clearing up the wording so you can't use the spell to cross from one room to another (The entrance is large enough you can use it to straddle a wall and move through a wall).
Actually, enemies have slightly higher Fortitude saves on average than anything else. Evasion doesn't come up often aside from classed humanoids, which are rarely a threat if non caster anyways due to *insert every non caster problem* magnified by having far less magic stuff to give them what they need such as AC, saves, etc. Reflex saves are the lowest on average. However, most of the high Fortitude enemies are just melee brute sacks of HP, whereas say mages, and outsiders have a lower save and are more dangerous. Those same melee brutes tend to have low Reflex saves. Course, chipping away with your 10d6 chisel or something is not useful.
Anyways, 'the game being balanced around Fireball' is simply more evidence that the playtesters of 3.0, and 3.5 had no idea what they were talking about, which is why the game progressively breaks down starting at around level 3, and shatters at 11. Interestingly enough, 90% of their playtesting focused on 1-10, weighted towards the low end of that scale. Correlation? I think so. Fireball stayed where it was. Everything else went way up. Of course it get left behind. It is no longer appropriate for level 5.
Someone on another forum suggested DD be buffed via being able to add the relevant stat modifier to each damage die, up to the maximum spell level. So a wizard would do 1 extra damage per missile of Magic Missile provided he had 12 Int, but he wouldn't get any more with extra Intelligence. A 10th level caster with Fireball and Int/Cha of 16 or greater would do 30 extra damage. A 20th level caster with Horrid Wilting and 26 Int/Cha would do 160 extra damage. Only problem with this method is it scales perhaps a little too fast. 20d6+160 has a decent chance of an instant kill even if you make the save. Though, no one cares much if Magic Missile does 5d4+10, instead. So perhaps some slower scaling (keep the casting modifier relevant), and make sure it applies to EACH DIE (Warmage fails at its intended design goal because it does not heed this lesson) so that CL is also relevant and it scales properly... that might make Fireball (now doing 5d6+15 when you first get it) keep up.
Also, while we're at it let's discuss the fifteen minute adventuring day, and how to stop it. No, I don't mean removing Rope Trick and such. I mean discussing ways of actually making the very fast paced combat actually allow for that, as I assume the term means fight your 4 battles in 15 minutes, then rest repeat.
The rope must remain anchored to the ground and visible *or* the entrance to the rope trick dimension is conspicuous and can be discovered with a normal spot check *or* both. Even with a conspicuous entrance this is a powerful spell. I would also suggest clearing up the wording so you can't use the spell to cross from one room to another (The entrance is large enough you can use it to straddle a wall and move through a wall).
I like this, I think it's appropriate for a low-level "free rest" spell, which is to say a "slightly safer rest". Define a search DC to discover the portal, and now we have something that looks like a second level spell.
That wasn't so hard, and it's nice and compatible with "Prepared Spells, 2nd, Rope Trick" on any stat blocks out there.
It is no longer appropriate for level 5.
Far from disagreeing, this is the opinion I wanted to solicit. I bet many will disagree with you, but that's irrelevant. What is appropriate for a CR5 encounter? How could you fix fireball (or since that conversation is getting old, lightning bolt, or some other atrophied damage spell)? We need to set out terms that everyone in this conversation can agree on.
I don't personally care about what the playtesters did. I just want to know how to work with what we've got now.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Rope Trick needs some serious help, at the very least moved up to third level, maybe moved up to third plus the material component discussed above.I'm gonna keep nitpicking this one: Spell levels shouldn't change. Better to nerf or improve the spell than change the level.
Change the level, then you have to change the stat blocks in every published adventure, re-price magic items, rethink spells benchmarked off the changed spell, etc. Change the spell's description or add a caveat, costly component, etc, and it's relatively insular.
I'm not sure I agree with this, it would be very difficult to reasonably leave rope trick at second level and keep it even vaguely similar to what it currently does. So it's been proposed to go with an expensive component for rope trick. I can deal with that but I would go even a little bit further and suggest:
The rope must remain anchored to the ground and visible *or* the entrance to the rope trick dimension is conspicuous and can be discovered with a normal spot check *or* both. Even with a conspicuous entrance this is a powerful spell. I would also suggest clearing up the wording so you can't use the spell to cross from one room to another (The entrance is large enough you can use it to straddle a wall and move through a wall).
1. How about a simple for the spell: Give it a short duration. Maybe 1 round/lvl or 1 minute/lvl. Suddenly it's not a sleepy-place that, for game mechanical purposes, is pretty much just as good as a magnificent mansion (not as plush, but it gets the job done), a spell 5 levels higher.
2. What I actually think is a better fix, and more in line with a 2nd level spell in power: The spell doesn't create an extra-dimensional space. Instead, it creates an invisible platform that you can climb up to, and the platform itself radiates an invisibility sphere. If you pull up the rope into the sphere, it becomes invisible too. If you wanted to be extra-nice you could also make it function as a zone of silence.
This maintains the basic concept of the rope trick absolutely intact - it gives you a relatively safe place to hide and rest, which you reach by climbing a rope. You go up the rope, you are now off the ground and hidden.
But, it also satisfies all of the appropriate nerfs:
a. You avoid all of the extradimensional space cheats
b. As a sniping platform, it's not bad (you are up to 30' up) but you are also exposed to anyone who can climb or fly up to you or return fire without arguing about exactly how big the entrance is or what kind of cover the extradimensional 'walls' provide, blah blah.
c. You are just hidden and up high, which means that similar-level spells can find you (i.e., see invisibility) and get to you (i.e., levitate, spider climb). You are not piercing the fabric of the universe with a 2nd level spell.
d. Because you utilize the mechanics of other spells, you know what overcomes or breaks it - if you attack from the RT platform, use the rules for Inv Sphere, etc.
e. It's not better than those other spells, because even though it lets you climb (like SC), it's only 30' and only to this one spot; even though you can suspend people in the air (like levitate) it's only to this one spot and they can't move from there; even though you make several people invisible or silent (like inv. sphere and ZoS) it only exists as long as they stay put on this platform, doesn't move with them, etc.
So, those are my suggestions for fixing rope trick:
1. Keep it as is with a short duration; or, preferred,
2. Instead of extradimensional space, make it create a simple platform which serves as an invisible (and perhaps silent) hiding place.