Am I mistaken or is 1001 spells by rite publishing horribly broken?


Product Discussion

51 to 88 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Rite Publishing wrote:
Tels wrote:

My GM has 1001 spells on Hero Labs (he owns a hobby store and gets all Pathfinder supplements for free, jerk). He, and others, have begun using some of the 1001 spells and we've found some that were fairly powerful.

Lifechant, for example, is a spell that essentially gives the entire party fast healing as long as the bard concentrates. Give a wand of this to a Bard and watch it quickly replace all Cure Light Wounds Wands, especially if the Bard buys higher caster level versions of it. Or, buy/craft a 3rd level wand of Lifechant, and give it to a Wizard with Staff-like Wand with sufficient UMD.

Yeah this is one I will go back and change the duration on. It should have been only a couple of rounds.

Might want to change Deathchant as well as it's the negative energy version of Lifechant.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Liam Warner wrote:
so is it just me or are all the spells in this so horribly overpowered and broken?

It's just you, but as you can see they are very happy to listen to playtest results and make corrections where they feel it is warranted.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm not sure If I have a problem with Deathchant or Lifechant as written. But I use spells from 3pp as forgotten magic that is found in dusty lost tomes or taught by crazy hermits who experiment with dangerous spells.

Sovereign Court

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't find it so much more horribly broken than I what I see when I dare to peek at the official rule forums here... the HORROR ! the HORROR !


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Makarion wrote:
Sadly, Rite Publishing has the kind of track record that causes people to ban all third party material in PF games. No quality control whatsoever.

You must be thinking of another company. Rite Publishing has always put out quality material and it is run by very nice people. I should know since I have almost all of their books and I have never been unhappy with a purchase. The only problem has been with the HL file that was for this book but that was handled very well by Rite and had nothing to do with their book.


I will say the cantrip Mishap seems rather potent for an unlimited use 0-level spell. I see it as an out-of-combat tool, and it allows you to completely negate low level magical wards and such. It isn't gamebreaking, but it is very good.

Also, I think I found an error/typo. Under the "Defile" spell:

Quote:

Against plant creatures, the spell deals 1d6 points of damage

per caster level (maximum of 20d6). Defile is equally
effective against other opponents. Against living creatures
(except vermin, which are immune), the spell deals 1d8
points of damage per caster level (maximum of 10d8).

It's a 9th level spell, capping the effect at Caster Level 10 means that it is always 10d8 :P


I may have to take a look at this book just because it has a Balefire spell in it.

Though it is a bit too powerful in its secondary effects, honestly.

Can't even be resurrected by 90% of the GODS? A bit much.

And undoing 24 hours worth of actions may be too long of a time span. Even the Balefire in Wheel of Time could rarely undo more than a few seconds or minutes worth of actions, and even that f~$&ed up the Pattern royally.

May want to drop it to 10 minutes at most (enough to bring the people the Big Bad killed in the final battle back to life, and maybe his Big Triumphant Moment, but not enough to undo the final stages of his plan and all that good stuff) and/or have some hefty backlash (caster ages significantly, Wild Magic events spring up in the nearby area, random chance of some of YOUR actions being screwed up...or simply just "50% chance of an Inevitable showing up and asking what you're doing messing around with this kind of stuff").

Dark Archive

With regards to horribly broken things from Rite, I'll take the blame for that. After all, I've actually used Horrifically Overpowered Feats in published products.

I admit, I have a problem with making things "insane" when it comes to stacking and high-power. Just ask the players in my Horrifically Overpowered Kingmaker game....


Justin Sluder wrote:

With regards to horribly broken things from Rite, I'll take the blame for that. After all, I've actually used Horrifically Overpowered Feats in published products.

I admit, I have a problem with making things "insane" when it comes to stacking and high-power. Just ask the players in my Horrifically Overpowered Kingmaker game....

But is that something you should take "blame" for? That's a legitimate style of gaming. My own group does High-Magic Fantasy at a level where floating cities and councils of epic wizards are common. We're still all about the story, we just happen to focus on stories where multiple realities are threatened and gods are directly involved instead of stories where the local lord's political shenanigans are of concern.

If you have folks who ban items from the core rulebook you're always going to look "overpowered" or "insane" when you create a 3pp offering. So? You don't write for them. You write for my psychotic group. I have 100+ pdfs in my downloads and I allow almost 100% of all of them.


Rynjin wrote:


Can't even be resurrected by 90% of the GODS? A bit much.

I don't find it a bit much at all. Deities in many cultures and sources are not portrayed as all powerful. Their powers and abilities are, instead, tied to their specific domains. If it does not fall under their domains, they have no influence. In such instances, they may have to resort to bargaining, cajoling, or evening threatening another deity with the proper domain to intervene or stand down.

The above is also why people in polytheistic societies tend to give worship to or offer appeasement to all of the deities. They don't want to draw the ire of a given deity and/or they, at some point, may need to seek a blessing that falls under the domain of that deity.

The limit is built in from a perspective that recognizes the above. There is nothing wrong with that.


Aelfborn wrote:


I don't find it a bit much at all. Deities in many cultures and sources are not portrayed as all powerful. Their powers and abilities are, instead, tied to their specific domains. If it does not fall under their domains, they have no influence. In such instances, they may have to resort to bargaining, cajoling, or evening threatening another deity with the proper domain to intervene or stand down.
The above is also why people in polytheistic societies tend to give worship to or offer appeasement to all of the deities. They don't want to draw the ire of a given deity and/or they, at some point, may need to seek a blessing that falls under the domain of that deity.

The limit is built in from a perspective that recognizes the above. There is nothing wrong with that.

However, that is not how the gods of Golarion are portrayed.

They are not like the gods of the Forgotten Realms who ARE their portfolios and will actually lose or gain power/niches by acting differently. Their portfolios merely reflect their areas of interest and personality, not their limitations. They have the capability to grant any sort of power they please (as evidenced by that one Cleric archetype that lets them pick Domains outside their god's portfolio), but in general do not do so.

And while they may not be all powerful...they are certainly more powerful than any mortal magic you could care to think of. They're so far beyond mortal that mortals can't even touch them, much less BEST them, which is essentially what this spell is doing.


137ben wrote:

I will say the cantrip Mishap seems rather potent for an unlimited use 0-level spell. I see it as an out-of-combat tool, and it allows you to completely negate low level magical wards and such. It isn't gamebreaking, but it is very good.

Also, I think I found an error/typo. Under the "Defile" spell:

Quote:

Against plant creatures, the spell deals 1d6 points of damage

per caster level (maximum of 20d6). Defile is equally
effective against other opponents. Against living creatures
(except vermin, which are immune), the spell deals 1d8
points of damage per caster level (maximum of 10d8).
It's a 9th level spell, capping the effect at Caster Level 10 means that it is always 10d8 :P

Mishap: My thoughts were, It can backfire on you, there are not very many low level magical wards (assuming I don't set them off before I use the spell) it probably should have a caveat that if you fail the check you don't get to try again until you gain a caster level.

Yeah that should be 20d6, my bad (goes to shoot the editor).

Scarab Sages Contributor

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Justin Sluder wrote:

With regards to horribly broken things from Rite, I'll take the blame for that. After all, I've actually used Horrifically Overpowered Feats in published products.

I admit, I have a problem with making things "insane" when it comes to stacking and high-power. Just ask the players in my Horrifically Overpowered Kingmaker game....

Yeah, but the Horrifically Overpowered Feats were a Genius product originally, so rogue Genius Games and I should take the blame for those. :)


Quick question before I comment: is the "1001 spellbook" essentially a compilation of the other smaller spellbooks (101 1st-level spells, etc) with extras?

If so, then my only complain would be some errors here and there, like the short description being completely different than the long one or even some missing spells. For instance, there is a 4th-level spell named "Spiritbow, Lesser"... but the normal and greater vesions never showed up... and I bought the rest of the series.

Scarab Sages Contributor

JiCi wrote:
Quick question before I comment: is the "1001 spellbook" essentially a compilation of the other smaller spellbooks (101 1st-level spells, etc) with extras?

Yep!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

So what I'm hearing is that 1001 spells are not as broken as the rest of the spells in the game?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JiCi wrote:

Quick question before I comment: is the "1001 spellbook" essentially a compilation of the other smaller spellbooks (101 1st-level spells, etc) with extras?

If so, then my only complain would be some errors here and there, like the short description being completely different than the long one or even some missing spells. For instance, there is a 4th-level spell named "Spiritbow, Lesser"... but the normal and greater vesions never showed up... and I bought the rest of the series.

Yes we have tried to correct as many of those errors as possible (though I never did make the Greater Spiritbow), if you bought all the lesser books you should have been contacted via email via Drivehtru Rpg or Paizo with a complimentary copy of the 1001 Spells PDF.

If you did not reach out to me and we will verify your purchases and get you a comp copy.


Rite Publishing wrote:
JiCi wrote:

Quick question before I comment: is the "1001 spellbook" essentially a compilation of the other smaller spellbooks (101 1st-level spells, etc) with extras?

If so, then my only complain would be some errors here and there, like the short description being completely different than the long one or even some missing spells. For instance, there is a 4th-level spell named "Spiritbow, Lesser"... but the normal and greater vesions never showed up... and I bought the rest of the series.

Yes we have tried to correct as many of those errors as possible (though I never did make the Greater Spiritbow), if you bought all the lesser books you should have been contacted via email via Drivehtru Rpg or Paizo with a complimentary copy of the 1001 Spells PDF.

If you did not reach out to me and we will verify your purchases and get you a comp copy.

Well, not that it matters THAT much, since, well I'm okay with all 9 booklets, but I can tell you this:

- I bought 1st to 6th on DriveTHRU RPG
- I bought 7th, 8th and 9th on Paizo

I think that was BEFORE I understood how the Paizo store worked XD

Then again, thanks for the offer :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JiCi wrote:


Well, not that it matters THAT much, since, well I'm okay with all 9 booklets, but I can tell you this:
- I bought 1st to 6th on DriveTHRU RPG
- I bought 7th, 8th and 9th on Paizo

I think that was BEFORE I understood how the Paizo store worked XD

Then again, thanks for the offer :)

First there are 10 booklets. 0th level thorugh 9th. Looks like your missing 101 0-level Spells

But if you do have all nine and want to have the whole thing reach out to me, via PM and we will get something worked out for you to get the 1001 PDF.


Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
Liam Warner wrote:
so is it just me or are all the spells in this so horribly overpowered and broken?

It is you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rynjin wrote:

However, that is not how the gods of Golarion are portrayed.

While Golarion might be the default setting for Pathfinder, a third party product does not need to work with either the Golarion setting or its default pantheon in mind (My own preference is that they do not).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Aelfborn wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

However, that is not how the gods of Golarion are portrayed.

While Golarion might be the default setting for Pathfinder, a third party product does not need to work with either the Golarion setting or its default pantheon in mind (My own preference is that they do not).

Unless specifically stated otherwise or given an alternative (which I don't believe this book does) I generally assume the default setting is Golarion, since that IS the setting of PFRPG by default.


Rite Publishing wrote:
137ben wrote:

I will say the cantrip Mishap seems rather potent for an unlimited use 0-level spell. I see it as an out-of-combat tool, and it allows you to completely negate low level magical wards and such. It isn't gamebreaking, but it is very good.

Also, I think I found an error/typo. Under the "Defile" spell:

Quote:

Against plant creatures, the spell deals 1d6 points of damage

per caster level (maximum of 20d6). Defile is equally
effective against other opponents. Against living creatures
(except vermin, which are immune), the spell deals 1d8
points of damage per caster level (maximum of 10d8).
It's a 9th level spell, capping the effect at Caster Level 10 means that it is always 10d8 :P

Mishap: My thoughts were, It can backfire on you, there are not very many low level magical wards (assuming I don't set them off before I use the spell) it probably should have a caveat that if you fail the check you don't get to try again until you gain a caster level.

Yeah that should be 20d6, my bad (goes to shoot the editor).

Mishap: sounds reasonable. Thanks for the fix on Defile.

Quote:

Yes we have tried to correct as many of those errors as possible (though ...if you bought all the lesser books you should have been contacted via email via Drivehtru Rpg or Paizo with a complimentary copy of the 1001 Spells PDF.

If you did not reach out to me and we will verify your purchases and get you a comp copy.

Is there a way to do this in reverse (i.e., if I have 1001 spells, can I get them separated?)

I don't mind having them all in one PDF, but sometimes I would like to be able to see spells of a certain level, and not all of them are on the pfsrd...
Actually, it would probably be just as good if the short descriptions in the class spell lists linked to the full spell description (the way it works in Legendary's Mythic Magic: Core Spells).
If that would be too much to add, I can continue using control+F:)

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
Unless specifically stated otherwise or given an alternative (which I don't believe this book does) I generally assume the default setting is Golarion, since that IS the setting of PFRPG by default.

Since Pathfinder is setting neutral you would do well not to assume everyone else assumes the same.


TriOmegaZero wrote:


Since Pathfinder is setting neutral

Supposedly.

All the rules on alignment and alignment restrictions for classes kinda speaks to the contrary.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Alignment does not imply a setting.

Edit: a specific setting rather.


Rynjin wrote:
Aelfborn wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

However, that is not how the gods of Golarion are portrayed.

While Golarion might be the default setting for Pathfinder, a third party product does not need to work with either the Golarion setting or its default pantheon in mind (My own preference is that they do not).
Unless specifically stated otherwise or given an alternative (which I don't believe this book does) I generally assume the default setting is Golarion, since that IS the setting of PFRPG by default.

Golarion is the default setting off PFS. However, PFS doesn't allow 3rd party, so it doesn't matter to this discussion. Unless there was an Inner Sea world chapter in the core book that I missed, Pathfinder doesn't assume a default setting. Otherwise there'd be no distinction between rules supplements and setting supplements. The deities listed in the core book are Golarion deities, but since there's no setting info with them, they can work however you'd like.


While the Pathfinder rules are setting neutral, Golarion is the official setting of Pathfinder, not just the PFS sub-game.


Rynjin wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:


Since Pathfinder is setting neutral

Supposedly.

All the rules on alignment and alignment restrictions for classes kinda speaks to the contrary.

considering i cant even reference golarion in any of the products i work on, i can say i agree with your assumptions. I cant speak for rite of course, i know little red goblin games never made anything specifically for golarion.


Scythia wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Aelfborn wrote:
Rynjin wrote:

However, that is not how the gods of Golarion are portrayed.

While Golarion might be the default setting for Pathfinder, a third party product does not need to work with either the Golarion setting or its default pantheon in mind (My own preference is that they do not).
Unless specifically stated otherwise or given an alternative (which I don't believe this book does) I generally assume the default setting is Golarion, since that IS the setting of PFRPG by default.
Golarion is the default setting off PFS. However, PFS doesn't allow 3rd party, so it doesn't matter to this discussion. Unless there was an Inner Sea world chapter in the core book that I missed, Pathfinder doesn't assume a default setting. Otherwise there'd be no distinction between rules supplements and setting supplements. The deities listed in the core book are Golarion deities, but since there's no setting info with them, they can work however you'd like.

Just to be clear no 3rd party publisher can use any part of the Golarion deities, as they are Paizo's IP and are not Open Gaming Content you can't reference them at all as a 3rd Party Publisher.


christos gurd wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:


Since Pathfinder is setting neutral

Supposedly.

All the rules on alignment and alignment restrictions for classes kinda speaks to the contrary.

considering i cant even reference golarion in any of the products i work on, i can say i agree with your assumptions. I cant speak for rite of course, i know little red goblin games never made anything specifically for golarion.

that was supposed to be "can't say i agree with your assumptions". Stupid phone.


As I just finished reading the entire WoT series, let me say that a Balefire spell is really badass.

I would however, suggest a sort of scaling period of time it can reverse. After all, BF generally just reversed a small amount of time, but I assume some of the more powerful, angreal enhanced BFs would reverse more and more time.

I will admit that such an effect might be too difficult for an RPG, which I totally understand.


Other 9th level spells that have drastic effects have a 9th level spell that can reverse them, so I think a spell that can erase you from time ought to have a 9th level spell that can put you back.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Rulebook Subscriber
Rite Publishing wrote:
Tels wrote:

My GM has 1001 spells on Hero Labs (he owns a hobby store and gets all Pathfinder supplements for free, jerk). He, and others, have begun using some of the 1001 spells and we've found some that were fairly powerful.

Lifechant, for example, is a spell that essentially gives the entire party fast healing as long as the bard concentrates. Give a wand of this to a Bard and watch it quickly replace all Cure Light Wounds Wands, especially if the Bard buys higher caster level versions of it. Or, buy/craft a 3rd level wand of Lifechant, and give it to a Wizard with Staff-like Wand with sufficient UMD.

Yeah this is one I will go back and change the duration on. It should have been only a couple of rounds.

Duration: Concentration (Max 1 round / level)


James Jacobs provided me ammo earlier today from an completely unrelated thread so I'm going to fire it because I can.

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Unless specifically stated otherwise or given an alternative (which I don't believe this book does) I generally assume the default setting is Golarion, since that IS the setting of PFRPG by default.
Since Pathfinder is setting neutral you would do well not to assume everyone else assumes the same.
James Jacobs wrote:


I don't see it to be problematic. There IS a difference there between Golarion and all those other worlds though. The Pathfinder rules are built to work for ANY game world, of course, but at the same time they do have an underlying assumption—Golarion, or a Golarion-like setting.

Neener neener boo boo. =p

Inb4 someone takes that last bit absolutely seriously.

Shadow Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Right in the honor!

Spoiler:
Isn't that the guy that allowed paladins of Asmodeus? ;)

#shotsfired


Rynjin wrote:

James Jacobs provided me ammo earlier today from an completely unrelated thread so I'm going to fire it because I can.

TriOmegaZero wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Unless specifically stated otherwise or given an alternative (which I don't believe this book does) I generally assume the default setting is Golarion, since that IS the setting of PFRPG by default.
Since Pathfinder is setting neutral you would do well not to assume everyone else assumes the same.
James Jacobs wrote:


I don't see it to be problematic. There IS a difference there between Golarion and all those other worlds though. The Pathfinder rules are built to work for ANY game world, of course, but at the same time they do have an underlying assumption—Golarion, or a Golarion-like setting.

Neener neener boo boo. =p

Inb4 someone takes that last bit absolutely seriously.

Curses, direct statements to the contrary, my only weakness. :P

You win this round.


Rite Publishing wrote:
Just to be clear no 3rd party publisher can use any part of the Golarion deities, as they are Paizo's IP and are not Open Gaming Content you can't reference them at all as a 3rd Party Publisher.

Well not entirely true Steve, you "could" use the Community Use policy. But then you couldn't make money off said product. But it's possible. :P

I should also note that PCGen uses the Community Use Policy :)

51 to 88 of 88 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Product Discussion / Am I mistaken or is 1001 spells by rite publishing horribly broken? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Product Discussion