The Beast shape and Dragon form spells give the caster size bonuses to their stats but the Transformation and Iron Body spells give an enhancement bonus.
The Enhancement bonus steps on so many other spells and enchantments to limit the usefulness of these spells. I would like to change the type of bonus to something other than enhancement. Have any suggestions?
The Beast shape and Dragon form spells give the caster size bonuses to their stats but the Transformation and Iron Body spells give an enhancement bonus.
The Enhancement bonus steps on so many other spells and enchantments to limit the usefulness of these spells. I would like to change the type of bonus to something other than enhancement. Have any suggestions?
I think there is a reason those spells are enhancement bonuses and not size bonuses. Both of the spells you mention (Transformation and Iron body) are altering your body, or "Enhancing" it. It may be inconvienent to you, but it's that way because the that is the proper way to label the bonus. It certainly isn't luck, insight, or any other kind of bonus.
Yes they do not alter size so it makes sense to make the bonuses an enhancement bonus. The problem is that enhancement bonuses are extremely easy to get and they do not stack.
The fact that transformation will not stack with a belt of giant strength or a level 2 bulls strength spell means that a mage has little reason to use these spells. The Dragon form is the same level, gives similar bonuses, will stack with bulls strength, and will allow you to cast spells.
I want to make the Transformation and iron body spells a different type to make them more useful for the arcane caster.
Have any suggestion of what alternative type to make the stat bonus?
A competence bonus to stats doesn't sound right and it isn't a size bonus. What other kinds of stat bonuses are there?
The material component for Transformation is a potion of Bull's strength, so I'd argue that it is definitely not intended to stack.
I want to make the Transformation and iron body spells a different type to make them more useful for the arcane caster.
The usefulness is that your shape hasn't changed. You can use weapons or even walk into a bar without someone looking at you oddly.
Look at what uses "Size Bonus": Polymorph Effects and nothing else.
It would really be clearer to just call it a "Polymorph Bonus",
since naturally Large/Giant/etc creatures DON'T have a "Size Bonus" (unless Polymorphed)
Transformation/Iron Body/Bull's Strength do NOT change your form,
but are ENHANCEMENTS to your current Form. The Bonus from Polymorph Effects ("Size Bonus"/Polymorph Bonus) is an 'inherent' bonus from the new form itself, not a magical "enhancement" separate from that form.
Size happens to be ONE of the aspects of "Form", but not the only one.
Does that make sense?
Sure that all makes sense but the spell is still not useful.
I am looking for a way to make this a spell a caster could use effectively. If the mage has no str score that +4 enhancement bonus will only get him up a +2 to hit and damage which he could already have with a level 2 spell. All of the bonuses of the spell will not turn a wizard into a swordsman and certainly no match for a real fighter.
I am trying to find a simple way to make this worth casting. A 50% boost to all the bonuses would be a good start but having it stack with enhancement bonuses would have been more elegant. That way the mage who wanted to use this spell could buff up in other ways and then use this spell before engaging in melee or he could use a belt of physical perfection and still get the benefits.
Well... It DOES stack with any of the Polymorph Spells (Dragon Form, Elemental Form, etc)
If you change it to Size Bonus (breaking internal logic I explained above),
that makes it stack w/ Enhancement but NOT Polymorph... same net effect.
But it IS a wierd spell that indeed doesn't seem "worth it" for 99% of Casters.
Who do I see using it: Dragon Disciples or Eldritch Knights, in a Polymorphed Form and with every other Buff they have, throwing on Transformation for extra BAB and over-all physical stat bump before wading into melee.
Honestly, if there are a few spells that only "Gish" Casters can make good use of, I'm all for it,
because the rest of their abilities are a distraction from being a Full Caster.
I would like to change the type of bonus to something other than enhancement. Have any suggestions?Suggestion: Don't do it. Leave them Enchantment or break a lot of balance.
So what balance issues would be broken by making it a spell worth casting? Right now it isn't worth the ink it's printed with. Or do you disagree and think this is a great spell you would encourage your arcane casters to cast.
I am not trying to start another flame war about how arcane casters are over powered. I am just looking for suggestions on how to make this thing worth using.
Hmmm. I have an interesting thought on a change you might make. Instead of having transformation outright prohibit all casting, instead you might have it cut away the top three spellcasting levels. That way you can still incorporate various buffs/utilities, but the top spell levels aren't available.
(And yeah, I have never, ever, EVER, seen Tenser's Transformation used by a caster, only by a UMD rogue with a staff with it on it lol)
Oh that isn't a bad idea but let's turn that around. What if when under this spell you just got a -20 on all concentration rolls. That way spell casting would be nearly impossible in melee but if he isn't threatened he can cast any spell he wants.
With Iron body you can already cast spells if you just use the still spell metamagic constantly to negate the armor penalties.
|
The Beast shape and Dragon form spells give the caster size bonuses to their stats but the Transformation and Iron Body spells give an enhancement bonus.
The Enhancement bonus steps on so many other spells and enchantments to limit the usefulness of these spells. I would like to change the type of bonus to something other than enhancement. Have any suggestions?
The whole point of designing those bonuses was EXACTLY to put some kind of brake as to how far you could pump up your stats. That's also the reason that spells that give other kinds of bonuses are either spread out between various classes or significantly bumped up in level.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
So what balance issues would be broken by making it a spell worth casting? Right now it isn't worth the ink it's printed with. Or do you disagree and think this is a great spell you would encourage your arcane casters to cast.
It is as great as every other spell that enhances abilities (they are all most all Enhancement bonuses and the few that are not are higher level for less bonus.)
So in short, yes it is a great spell and there is no need to break balance by pumping it up without a reason.
|
A little late, I know, but I think the proliferation of enhancement bonuses is why they don't stack. I mean, it is already a little sick...
Party:
Druid lvl 5
Wizard lvl 5
Cleric lvl 5
Bard lvl 5
Round 1:
Cleric casts Prayer
Bard Casts Heroism on Druid
Wizard casts Bull Strength on Druid
Druid Wild shapes into a medium animal
Round 2
Druid casts Magic Fang on self
Bard starts using Inspire courage
Wizard Casts Rage on Druid
Cleric does his thing
Round 3:
Druid spells:
spell = effective +hit/+damage Bonus type
Prayer = +1/+1 Luck ( to attack/damage )
Magic Fang = +1/+1 Enhancement( to attack/damage )
Bull Strength = +2/+2 Enhancement( to Strength )
Heroism = +2/+0 Morale( to attack )
Beast Shape = +1/+1 Size( to strength )
Rage = +1/+1 Morale( to Strength )
Inspire Courage = +2/+2 Competence( to attack/damage )
Total = +10/+8
That really isn't bad at all for lvl 5. Granted it takes some planning and investment into one char, but most of those can be made into potions or scrolls.
that is with just a little digging. I am sure someone else could come up with something better.
Frankly, the whole "type" bonuses are just plain silly, especially when players begin tinkering with the types.
"Hey, my Eyes of the Eagle were specially made by the Elves, and gives an 'Elf' bonus to perception!"
"Since I worship the Luck gods, I have 2 spells for you: One is just plain old 'Prayer", the other is 'Lady Luck', which is just like prayer, except those are luck bonuses instead..."
Just impose a hard cap and be done with it. Anything can stack up to +10 or some junk. That way spells and such work fine with +6 belts/cloaks/etc., but you can't find every odd boost in the game to formulate ridiculious combo's.
If you want TT and Iron Body to work with items or other spells, you could change the bonus type to "inherrent".
Yeah, and why are you letting players tinker with bonuses? Let alone inventing spells, and creating whole new bonus types that don't already exist?
Yea lets not let player create custom spells. That idea is just crazy good thing that was left out of the rules.... oh wait it is in the rules.
I like the inherent bonus idea.
The main problem I see with some spells not stacking is in magic itens actually. Yesterday I was playing and My char has a +2 Bracers of Armor (enhancement bonus) I've cast protection form evil an guess what? No Ac bonus... that's kinda bogus...
I like the fact that some spells do not stack and all that. But I think there should be some more rules into it, like a chart or something like that, and more types of bonuses, don't know. I think I'm trolling a little bit. ;)
The main problem I see with some spells not stacking is in magic itens actually. Yesterday I was playing and My char has a +2 Bracers of Armor (enhancement bonus) I've cast protection form evil an guess what? No Ac bonus... that's kinda bogus...
I like the fact that some spells do not stack and all that. But I think there should be some more rules into it, like a chart or something like that, and more types of bonuses, don't know. I think I'm trolling a little bit. ;)
Bracers of Armor=Armor bonus
Protection from Evil=deflection bonusThey stack, you was robbed.
Yea lets not let player create custom spells. That idea is just crazy good thing that was left out of the rules.... oh wait it is in the rules.
I like the inherent bonus idea.
custom spells maybe. Custom spells for the apparent purpose of circumventing the stacking rules by creating a spell just like another spell that simply uses a different bonus type? No. Custom magic items? Great, actually make an item I like as a DM and I'll allow it, however try and make some "gloves of elfiness" (giving a +2 elf bonus to Dex) to go with your belt of dexterity, and I'll nix it.
There's a huge difference between stifling creativity and saying no to something inane that the PC came up with simply to circumvent the standard rules of play.
Sorry, I thought on thing and wrote another one... Ring of protection. ;)
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Yeah, and why are you letting players tinker with bonuses? Let alone inventing spells, and creating whole new bonus types that don't already exist?
Just say no to the player.
I like the inherent bonus idea.
Just say no also, Inherent is for permanent bonuses and only come from Wish/Miracle.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
There really are too many bonus types. After all, if you worked hard enough you could benefit from a sacred and a profane bonus to whatever.
And it would require your DM interpret very strict RAW.
I, for one, would reject that (using both sacred and profane simultaneously) based on the RAI meaning of the RAW (and be happy saying I am following the rules as written.)
There's a huge difference between stifling creativity and saying no to something inane that the PC came up with simply to circumvent the standard rules of play.Well, a Fatespinner worshiping a luck goddess would certainly have many RP reasons for wanting to create "luck" spells in her honor (even named after her). Where do you say "That's just being cheesy" vs "Well, you campaigned for it, found excellent story reasons for it, and have a character well suited to it".
If your answer for the 2nd is yes, then I, as a player, just got away with it, since I love the fluff stuff and generally make sure to have exactly those kinds of RP reasons for doing cheesy things. It takes no time or intellect to reason your way into a good excuse.
If you said no, are we even playing a RP game? Why don't we just all make WoW characters on a RP server and be done with it!
Sure have the luck bonus, she doesn't grant the normal spell now at all. However I'm more likely to just say, "use the prayer spell as is."
A change to the mechanics isn't needed in this case, to put it your way they are "playing WoW" and just trying to rack up their bonuses. You want to change the name? Fine it's still the same spell, I'm not worried about fluff bits. So what if you call Invisibility "Move unseen" as long as we both understand that See Invisibility will still see you. Fluff is great, you can call yourself "the world's greatest swordsman." You take the feat and PrC I'll even go with it with the NPCs. But I'm still not going to let you auto crit on everything.
IF you actually want to bring something creative to the table fine, but renaming a spell and it's bonus type doesn't hit my mark for creative RPG design. Fortunately you are more than welcome to start your own game if you like where you do allow such simple minded tactics to add in additional bonuses that are not necessary or needed. Of course if you then use your house rules to say that the "system is broken" or "that class is too powerful" then you've set yourself up for it.
So why do I say, "NO"? Simple, I keep it to the same level as a DM. If you face an NPC in combat then they will have class levels, they will have HP, their items will be bought with the NPC standard wealth, and their stats will be no higher than the Stat buy you used to create your character, or the norm for their monster type.
IF you want me as a DM to start going "OH he has an Elf bonus to AC, and a Luck bonus to hit and then he cast prayer, and has several circumstance bonuses from his Modified Good Hope spell." Then fine, but I stick to the rules that I give my players so that everyone knows where the field stands.
Saying no is not the same as going over to an mmo style game, and if you can't see the difference we are done here. Very Strawman of you.
stance that a permanent cap on all bonuses would work better than different bonus types that stack
Sure be creative. Actually create something. Renaming spells isn't creating something. Renaming bonuses isn't creating something.
And by the way you just moved the goal posts -- your original "creative spell" was the same spell, same level with different bonuses, prayer in your example. Your new example is has a change in spell level... and you are right I might allow that one, simply because it requires a higher level spell.
However you still haven't actually created anything. You've renamed, which isn't necessary.
If you instead actually came up with something creative and new I might allow it. If a player comes to me and says, "I would like to play a monk that doesn't use magic but does have mystic powers" I would be willing to work with him/her to find something that works.
However your statement that a "bonus cap" would be the way to go is patently ridiculous just as it was during play test.
For example "Bonus cap = +20". Fine your max AC is 30 (10+20) your maximum to hit is +20, your maximum stat modifier is 20, your maximum bonus HP is 20, your maximum bonus on a skill check is 20. It doesn't matter where the bonus comes from you may not have a total bonus higher than 20, maximum bonus to saves is 20...
It doesn't matter how you reach 20 once you do you are stuck, no more. It's arbitrary, it doesn't work as a system, and it doesn't allow any actual creativity.
IF you decided to create a spell called "Lady Luck's Dice" that was first level, and gave you a +/-5 luck bonus on gambling, for 10 min/lvl I could go with that. If said spell also worked on "fluke instances" say against miss chance, and what effect you get while confused (chances that you have no means to control as a player) I might want it a level higher but I could go with that too, it actually does something that isn't already done.
However all you are asking for is more bonuses on top of what you already have, and you've been too lazy to actually come up with a new and creative something to give me a reason to say yes. You simply choose a spell, renamed it, and changed it's bonus type. That is not creative.
I do allow custom classes, spells, feats, and races... after I approve them. Some get turned away the first (sometimes even second time) because either they aren't balanced, or they are a simply don't fit, but that doesn't mean I have a "no homebrew" policy (which is a ridiculous idea in the first place).
I have a "I have authority to turn down things" policy. It's given to me by those same rules you are citing as saying you can do what you want.
Try to actually create something, then we'll see. Again renaming spells and bonuses is not creative.
[lots of stuff]Basically, you just said what I thought you would, which is that creative gamers can and will do these things, and that you will disallow it, making the game little more than a more interractive NWN map.
Magic Weapon - 1st level
New Spell: Lucky Blades - 2nd level, does the same as magic weapon.This is such a completly permissable spell combo, it's not even funny. Such things are all over the Spell Compendium. And the example took me less time to think up than reading your post.
If you just blanket disallow spell creation, then that's your bit. To try to constrain it along narrow lines is just plain insulting to the players. THAT is why I would like to see all the different typed bonuses go away in favor of a single bonus cap: ex. "You can only have a +10 magic bonus to attack/damage." A prawer stacks with bless which stacks with daggerspell stance which stacks with divine power ad nauseum, but only up to +10. All bonuses basically become "magic" typed, and stack with everything else up to a certain max.
Feats and class abilities have a good argument for making the type more source based, since then they would stack with each other, but all bonuses from spells should just cap. IMHO.
We are not suggesting banning spell creation just the unwarranted creation of new stack-able bonuses.
I basically agree with Abraham spalding's comments, what part of thisGMW---------------------------------Enhancement bonus
Grace of Luck-----------------------As GMW but Luck Bonus
Insightful blades-------------------As GMW but Insight bonus
Reverent blades-------------------As GMW but Sacred bonus
Murderous blades-----------------As GMW but Profane bonus
Blades of our ancestors----------As GMW but Racial bonus
Blademasters steady hand------As GMW but Competence bonus
Euphoric blades-------------------As GMW but Morale bonus
and as an homage to you
Magic's greater weapon----------As GMW but "Magic" bonus
do you consider creative? It is simple minded and plagiaristic (is that even a real word?)
As for arbitrary caps I believe abraham summed it up well, the only thing I would add would be if you do as you suggest; get rid of named bonuses altogether and leave them as unnamed bonuses and stack to your hearts content or at least to +10.
BTW. Iron body sux for a mage. You want to make it a usable spell change the range to touch. Slap that on your fighter and cut him loose.
Snapshot - Just my 2 coppers worth
The Beast shape and Dragon form spells give the caster size bonuses to their stats but the Transformation and Iron Body spells give an enhancement bonus.
The Enhancement bonus steps on so many other spells and enchantments to limit the usefulness of these spells. I would like to change the type of bonus to something other than enhancement. Have any suggestions?
The purpose of enhancement bonuses not stacking is that the max you can get pre-epic levels is +6 on an item. Now you could pay 64,000 GP for a belt of physical perfection to give yourself a constant +4 to STR/Dex/Con. Pay 32,000 GP for an amulet of natural armor +4, I'm going to say at least 10,000 GP for +5 fort saves..not sure of an item that does that, 25K for all saves 10K sounds fair for just +5 fort, and it's going to be a huge chunk of change to find an item to grant you a bonus to your BAB giving you extra attacks but I'm going to assume it's only raising your attacks per round by 1(could raise it by more), so I'm so I'm going to say 32,000 GP for a speed weapon, it should really be more since you could gain more than 1 attack by using transformation. You also need to multiclass to get proficiency with all martial and simple weapons.
Alternatively you could cast transformation (and save all that money to buy things you can't duplicate with your spells) to give yourself +4 to all those stats, the same bonus to natural armor and fort saves, full BAB, and proficiency with all simple and martial weapons. This can be done as a standard action, contingent with stoneskin if you like.