|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Get rid of it. Knew it was broken the moment I read it in 2009. As is Burning Disarm on the previous page, just not quite as egregiously. It should be a 9th level spell ("Immediate Spell" couldn't be less than a +5 level metamagic feat).<sarcasm>Okay. Let's throw featherfall and Stone Shield up as 9th level spells too. </sarcasm>
*chuckle* Terrible editing on my part there. Burning Disarm was an aside. Emergency Force Sphere should be 9th level.
Prismatic Sphere vs Emergency Force Sphere... absolute defense against any attack vs absolute defense against almost any attack before the attack hits you the first time. Pretty sure I'd choose Emergency Force Sphere.
This spell is so powerful that I generally avoid complaining about it, for fear of spreading word of it.
And I really don't think 1d4-5d4 damage is OP.
Ranged, with no attack roll or saving throw *is* OP, especially for clerics and druids. Better than Snowball probably, no attack roll but does have SR.
Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
authors need to add EmergFrcSph to the NPC's repertoireI personally agree with John's statements, Emergency Force Sphere is one of the rare abilities which is easily abusable by the PCs, but provides little to no benefit to NPCs. It allows Wizards, Sorcerers, and Arcanists a "get out of jail free card" which allows them to completely ignore any defensive weakness they may have.Which weakness are we talking about?
No seriously I actually have two character concepts who can basically completely bypass the dam thing. Its not a particularly scary spell in my book if you can accidentally create a character that can hard counter a spell.
|
Obviously it isn't as clear cut as you claim.I think it is pretty clear cut the effect has happened or it hasn't happened. If it hasn't happened the target hasn't been chosen. If it did happen then proceed with the "Effect" section of the spell.
There isn't much support for time during the effect besides dramatic storytelling. Which is pretty much to say none as far as the rules are concerned.
Well hopefully some sort of rules based logic for your position appears to help give credit to it. I think most people will be referencing the Casting Time section now for decisions regarding this spell.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Or spellcraft. NPCs can roll spellcraft too, especially when they are wielders of magic themselves.
I´m against banning. It seems this is the work of some people who abuse stuff, who will just find the next thing to abuse. And what will get banned then? Snowball, icy prison, etc?
As written in the spell description this spell had a different purpose than such in-combat uses.
Oracle of heavens moonlight bridge offers similar things...and more than enough room for interpretations and table variation.
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can be counted in the camp in favor of getting rid of it.
I was very sad to see this thread pop up, as now a lot more people will be aware of its existence. It was in a side book (not a hardcover), I believe, which kept it off peoples' radar. Now that everyone is talking about it I'm a bit bummed, as I expect it to start popping up regularly in my area. I nixed it in my home games after having the very same rules debate with my players that is being had here, but obviously don't have that option in PFS.
My feeling is that a 4th level spell that is capable of stopping threats at the 15+ challenge rating in their tracks becomes an auto-include on a spell list. If PFS developers and writers have to start designing their encounters with this spell in mind, then that merely proves the point of how ubiquitous it is.
Something that is an auto-include for players, and something that is being "meta-gamed" by writers and developers and GMs, is something that is out of whack and should be set aside.
PS - Snowball should be banned, too, by virtue of the same reasoning (auto-include and metagaming). (-;
|
The issue with EFS is that most casters don't use it. Those that do use it are those that can negate its downsides (aka, being put in timeout for the duration of the fight or needing to use a standard action to dismiss it).
For those saying "limit it to Seeker-level play", this discussion came from the Seeker level tables - it's just as disruptive there, and that's coming from an environment rich with potential for disruptiveness. More importantly, the nature of emergency force shield means that any sort of counter-tactic comes up with "please wait".
As John pointed out in earlier discussions, compared to other immediate action defense options, it's rather overpowered.
I'm favor of banning it.
|
You are overestimating the value of the immediate action vs the ability to be offensive. Also, an immediate action is only as valuable as your character's insight into the goings-on around him and what your GMs view of how immediate actions work is. And as well... sure it is fantastic versus an AOE. But what if the enemy is casting Phantasmal Killer? Do you EFS or hope the enemy isn't going to target you?The difficulties with this spell are:
1) Overpowered for its spell level according to any reasonable understanding of the metamagic rules.
2) Abuses action economy in PFS by easily negating almost all spells/effects/attacks with an immediate action.
3) Frustrates GMs and other players that are not Wizards/Sorcs as well as developers.
4) All drawbacks of this spell are easily overcome by dimensional slide/shifting which are common to many Wizard builds.
Please ban or only allow this spell for Seeker level play only.
1) Just simply no here. Your 'rule' would put featherfall in the same category.
2) It is not an abuse. That's like saying getting extra damage from power attack is an abuse. Or using furious focus to remove the penalty from power attack is an abuse.
Also, it will only negate spells that you know are coming. Most spells you can not know are going to target you. So you can go ahead and use your EFS for the day while the BBEG casts at the fighter.
3) Heh... I'd rather have evasion than EFS. Or paladin saves. The most frustrating stories I've heard so far are usually due to poor GM calls or not understanding the rules. Seriously, wouldn't you trade the EFS for the ability to make most saves that is always on?
4) Don't forget earth gliding, expeditious excavation or any number of other ways to utilize the fact that there is no bottom. But seriously, it's a defensive spell that will help you once. Woooo. You've done nothing to prevent the enemy from casting further. You've done nothing to prevent your party from being targeted. All you've done is saved your own bacon at the cost of a 4th level spell. And the next turn when you pop out of the bubble? You're no longer protected against the next spell.
The spell can be powerful versus certain kinds of attacks. This is no doubt. But it is a one and done. The best use I've seen so far that would actually be pretty frustrating is using possession from inside the bubble. You of course hope there isn't anyone who can cast Summon Mon for an earth elemental. But against non-casters it is really powerful. Then again, so is flying. Or having a necklace of adaptation and letting a party member pack you up into a extra dimensional pouch after casting possesion.
|
Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds
|
...generally just the caster is getting out of a melee attack...
Not the problem, actually. If it was just melee, I'd have left it alone in my home game (I'd rather the wizard were able to survive that kind of thing). But he was using it in response to being involved in spell combat, or to stop SA and SU abilities that required targeting.
Like I said, we ended up in a rules argument about timing of targeting, immediate actions, etc., and I just said, "This spell obviously doesn't work as intended; get it off your list."
|
|
Well i wouldn´t say that this spell doesn´t work as intended.
It´s a level 4 spell, which aren´t that plenty, it either needs a class feature or another spell to get out there or spending a standard action.
And if you have a class feature and don´t want to make that a full round, you have to take a feat.
In my eyes, for spending that resources, the spell does what it should.
A bards performance and the spell saving finale work in similar ways actually. It seems to me that many people are more upset about the immediate action thing. I don´t see such a big difference between this spell and abilities witches, clerics, warpriests and others have forcing people to reroll things etc. Of course that doesn´t prevent being targeted most times, but it´s a slightly different action economy too, needing less.
|
|
The cases where someone uses it to block line of effect for targets not within the radius of the dome is somewhat troubling and sounds obnoxious.
But otherwise, this is a 4th level spell (there are a great deal of other useful spells at that slot), has a hemispheric shape centered on the caster, cannot be reoriented to be below the caster (so limited use for folks in the air), and still consumes an action from the caster to get out of (even if its a swift action teleport, its still an action). Ultimately, its a defensive spell, and using it to negate effects until they get out of it doesn't seem so bad. There's several other players to interact with, yes?
It's rather useful in higher level play (inb4 "who cares about higher level play").
A save or suck shuts down encounters better than this spell does.
I think we should leave it in, but for the folks using it beyond its "obvious" applications to interfere with encounters in a great capacity, it might be good to remind them that "just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should" and that the GM is also trying to have fun. Ideally, I think it could be rebalanced by increasing the spell level, but I understand the difficulty of errata for splatbooks.
Contributor—Canadian Maplecakes
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I can be counted in the camp in favor of getting rid of it.
*Bunch of smart things*
PS - Snowball should be banned, too, by virtue of the same reasoning (auto-include and metagaming). (-;
And I apologize for making a scenario where it was deemed required to use (twice) in order to achieve victory on.
Throw me in the ban it category. Along with 'icy prison' ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have used EFS quite a bit. While it has saved my bacon on a few occasions, it also is not as overpowering as some people here think.
It requires getting out of, this in and of itself requires an expenditure of resources (unless you want to sit in time out for a while).
Most "abuse" comes at seeker levels. Seeker level play is also almost exclusively module play. Each resource expenditure is felt more keenly in modules l, especially if sleep is not a guarantee.
A player must weigh their options when deciding to use EFS. And this decision must be made quickly or the opportunity passes. This leads to dynamic engaged combats, which I find fun.
If a caster wishes to utilize EFS they need to pay attention when it is not their turn, I think this is a good thing.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8
|
My feeling is that a 4th level spell that is capable of stopping threats at the 15+ challenge rating in their tracks becomes an auto-include on a spell list...
PS - Snowball should be banned, too, by virtue of the same reasoning (auto-include and metagaming). (-;
Of my three mid to high level arcane caster characters (sorcerer, wizard, witch), none of them have emergency force sphere, snowball, or a staff of the master.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The cases where someone uses it to block line of effect for targets not within the radius of the dome is somewhat troubling and sounds obnoxious.
But otherwise, this is a 4th level spell (there are a great deal of other useful spells at that slot), has a hemispheric shape centered on the caster, cannot be reoriented to be below the caster (so limited use for folks in the air), and still consumes an action from the caster to get out of (even if its a swift action teleport, its still an action). Ultimately, its a defensive spell, and using it to negate effects until they get out of it doesn't seem so bad. There's several other players to interact with, yes?
It's also important to note that an immediate action uses up the next turn's swift action. So if one intends on using a swift action to leave, they must wait an extra turn.
|
I saw a wizard delay until the huge BBEG walked up to him, then use EFS when said BBEG started attacking him, come out of delay and use a standard to cast dimension door. Next round, he swift action teleported in, readied a dimension door for when the BBEG would try to climb aforementioned bubble and then effectively sealed off and entire section of the dungeon for ten minutes... with a second EFS. You may guess what happened.
TLDR; it can be a frustrating spell for GM's. But is it fun for the players?
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Of my three mid to high level arcane caster characters (sorcerer, wizard, witch), none of them have emergency force sphere, snowball, or a staff of the master.My feeling is that a 4th level spell that is capable of stopping threats at the 15+ challenge rating in their tracks becomes an auto-include on a spell list...
PS - Snowball should be banned, too, by virtue of the same reasoning (auto-include and metagaming). (-;
My seeker has snowall because she's a winter witch and at the time that was the only ranged damage spell she had. While it should be SR (yes) and Evocation let's not talk about banning it.
Or I'll start threads arguing to ban colour spray and work my way up from there. :P
|
|
As Carla just mentioned, EFS has offensive potential too.
It has a 5' radius, so you can put it around an adjacent opponent & teleport out. No save, no SR.
With team coordination, you could pull this on almost any medium enemy (or smaller) w/ few problems.
I've heard of at least one PC built around doing this.
It's at minimum a 3rd level effect w/ a +5 metamagic, but at 4th.
(Is it me or do the softcovers need more vetting before release?)
|
This is a spell I've been hoping would see some Errata or rewrite to be more in line with it's impact/effect in play (a 4th level "Nope" to anything targeted is a pretty wince worthy), but as it's been noted the existence of the spell in a smaller, soft cover book means this is unlikely. Further, PFS avoids having "special versions" of things like Spells for obvious reasons.
I'm going to +1 removing it. As stated, it's too much and I've seen it consistently used in play to negate at tier threats entirely for a given PC.
|
|
This spell has been around since the first Cheliax book came out. The Genie is out of the bottle on this one, and by taking it away, it will cause far more complaints than keeping it.
I do say leave it be, and in order to work on countering the spell, just be ready to actually use couterspells. A mage working in conjunction with anyone can nullify this spell completely and drop enormous bombs on people, if that's what you want to do. If you want your 300 + pt full melee attack or gigantic Horrid Wilting to kill people outright, just have them ready to counter it so their buddy can drop the bomb.
I do disagree with the action economy issue with the spell for NPc's though. Any caster smart enough to have this spell ready to go, is going mohave contingencies (not just the spell) ready to go. PC part of 5 - 6 runs in an the lone caster bad guy uses EFS. He Then teleports / Dimension Door's to a place where he can recover for a round or three, and now has the edge of surprise back. Or he casts stuff like Repulsion to get people away from him.
With the sheer amount of power going around because of the number of books that keep rolling in, this really seems like a puny spell compared to some of the junk people can pull these days. When doing less than 100+ Pts in a round is considered "non optimal" and everyone can easily make most of the sub -20 saving throws the average NPC wizard is tossing about with their spells, this seems pretty situational.
Of course, the best thing would be having an NPC wizard who knows the faintest glimmer of actual tactics when dealing with adventuring parties are. (I often find the biggest problems with NPC weakness to be their tactics, not their stats or spells, but that's a different thread).
I say keep it. Its not that big of a deal, and by the time it becomes a problem, most parties are at seeker level or at least close to it
|
|
I can be counted in the camp in favor of getting rid of it.
*Bunch of smart things*
PS - Snowball should be banned, too, by virtue of the same reasoning (auto-include and metagaming). (-;
And I apologize for making a scenario where it was deemed required to use (twice) in order to achieve victory on.
Throw me in the ban it category. Along with 'icy prison' ;)
like a french chef, no need to apologize. viva la creme brulee!
ummm, wait... there might be a bit of humor in saying ban it right after saying it was deemed necessary...
|
|
I have used EFS quite a bit. While it has saved my bacon on a few occasions, it also is not as overpowering as some people here think.
It requires getting out of, this in and of itself requires an expenditure of resources (unless you want to sit in time out for a while).
Most "abuse" comes at seeker levels. Seeker level play is also almost exclusively module play. Each resource expenditure is felt more keenly in modules l, especially if sleep is not a guarantee.
A player must weigh their options when deciding to use EFS. And this decision must be made quickly or the opportunity passes. This leads to dynamic engaged combats, which I find fun.
So - and this is NOT a rhetorical question - have you ever had a character who started the adventure with at least one emergency force sphere available die?
That's always been the reason I disliked it. It basically makes the user unkillable except in absolutely catastrophic circumstances. (Partly because the people who use it tend to be the same ones who crank up to double-digit initiative bonuses.) it might take a character out of the fight for a round, and maybe he decides to flee, but it almost completely removes the risk of death to that character.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It is quite puzzling to me why people keep clamoring for defensive options to be banned. These things are not removing enemies from the board, nor sequence breaking scenarios, nor invalidating entire combats. All they do is keep characters alive. Makes no sense.
Most other defenses aren't one stop shopping. They work against something specific, not everything.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Like I said, we ended up in a rules argument about timing of targeting, immediate actions, etc., and I just said, "This spell obviously doesn't work as intended; get it off your list."
That is your option, if you have a rules interpretation that makes this have trouble then fine.
But that deserves a rules answer more than an outright ban.
I don't have a PFS character with the spell, but I did have it for a Rise of the Runelord campaign. It really isn't as good as it sounds, due to the restrictions and the need to dismiss.
I have used it in PVP (one on one and one on many) games. In there it is golden. In a normal game, much less so.
I have used EFS quite a bit. While it has saved my bacon on a few occasions, it also is not as overpowering as some people here think.
It requires getting out of, this in and of itself requires an expenditure of resources (unless you want to sit in time out for a while).
Most "abuse" comes at seeker levels. Seeker level play is also almost exclusively module play. Each resource expenditure is felt more keenly in modules l, especially if sleep is not a guarantee.
A player must weigh their options when deciding to use EFS. And this decision must be made quickly or the opportunity passes. This leads to dynamic engaged combats, which I find fun.
So - and this is NOT a rhetorical question - have you ever had a character who started the adventure with at least one emergency force sphere available die?
That's always been the reason I disliked it. It basically makes the user unkillable except in absolutely catastrophic circumstances. (Partly because the people who use it tend to be the same ones who crank up to double-digit initiative bonuses.) it might take a character out of the fight for a round, and maybe he decides to flee, but it almost completely removes the risk of death to that character.
Yes- in the last module I played actually.
Also EFS has no effect against my most feared spell in the game. Disjunction blows right through it. You can kill me all you want but please don't destroy my gear. In a recent module
I tend to play with many layers of defense on my high level casters.
This allows me to hang back with my casters and not play rocket tag.
Casters have significant power mid to late game and can often win encounters before others can act (by stacking init).
If these defenses are lessened I will be less inclined to hold back from throwing proverbial nukes. This is only natural and out of self preservation.
Casters having defensive options allows them to take a step back and let others have fun too.
|
|
I can be counted in the camp in favor of getting rid of it.
*Bunch of smart things*
PS - Snowball should be banned, too, by virtue of the same reasoning (auto-include and metagaming). (-;
And I apologize for making a scenario where it was deemed required to use (twice) in order to achieve victory on.
Throw me in the ban it category. Along with 'icy prison' ;)
I've gotta be honest, with the understanding we have of EFS around here and the written tactics of the encounter where it was used, I can't blame the player for wanting to use it. That said, he rolled saves just to see what would happen and he would have succeeded anyway.
My objection to EFS is really two-sided:
- As it is ruled around here, it's a consequence-free escape.
- It's effectively a no-save-allowed Daze for the NPC.
Where are the most common applications going to come from here? Big, solo enemies. Frequently, that becomes a 6-to-1 trade in action economy. Because it's an immediate action, there's very little forethought involved.
|
I disagree. An immediate action is essentially an interrupt. It happens immediately.So as you see that death ray coming your way, you can pop the emergency force sphere. Same as if you were falling off a cliff, you can pop feather fall before you hit the ground.
Immediate Actions =/= Attacks of Opportunity
An attack of opportunity "interrupts" the normal flow of actions in the round. If an attack of opportunity is provoked, immediately resolve the attack of opportunity, then continue with the next character's turn (or complete the current turn, if the attack of opportunity was provoked in the midst of a character's turn).
So, the death ray/fire ball/disintegrate/blade barrier/whatever would hit you. THEN you could use your immediate action to cast EFS.
|
|
My objection to EFS is really two-sided:
- As it is ruled around here, it's a consequence-free escape.
- It's effectively a no-save-allowed Daze for the NPC.
I think most people are on board with being able to choose targets of spells when the effect happens and not allowing something else to happen during the effect.
The consequence could be endangering others around you while limiting your own action economy after using the spell because you are trapped in a bubble.
I don't think it is quite the same as dazing the enemy. If they were attacking they can still potentially move and if they were casting a spell they choose a legal target they have line of effect to.
My objection to EFS is really two-sided:
- As it is ruled around here, it's a consequence-free escape.
- It's effectively a no-save-allowed Daze for the NPC.
I think most people are on board with being able to choose targets of spells when the effect happens and not allowing something else to happen during the effect.
The consequence could be endangering others around you while limiting your own action economy after using the spell because you are trapped in a bubble.
I don't think it is quite the same as dazing the enemy. If they were attacking they can still potentially move and if they were casting a spell they choose a legal target they have line of effect to.
+1 to this.
I would like to see a ruling that there is not enough time between spell completion and effect for an immediate action. Immediate actions could still be used during spell casting, but the choice would have to be made before targeting.
Readied actions could still be used for the cool effects described above, only immediate actions would be affected.
|
|
So - and this is NOT a rhetorical question - have you ever had a character who started the adventure with at least one emergency force sphere available die?
In Race for the Runecarved Key...
Later that fight he gets pounced and grappled by whatever horrible beast is in the cage.
He's busy getting mauled to death, the party doesn't have a way out for him, he's at single digit hp and the beast is up next, and time is called on the encounter.
So he didn't actually die, but would have given another 30 seconds or so.
Also, I saw somebody die inside their own force sphere after locking themselves inside with an invisible will=o-the wisp they were unaware of.
As I posted above, immediate actions do not give the right to interrupt others actions. Once someone starts casting, it is too late to use your immediate action, unless the text of the spell/feat explicitly states otherwise. Emergency Force Sphere does not give you the ability to interrupt casting, only to cast it on someone else's turn.My objection to EFS is really two-sided:
- As it is ruled around here, it's a consequence-free escape.
- It's effectively a no-save-allowed Daze for the NPC.
I think most people are on board with being able to choose targets of spells when the effect happens and not allowing something else to happen during the effect.
The consequence could be endangering others around you while limiting your own action economy after using the spell because you are trapped in a bubble.
I don't think it is quite the same as dazing the enemy. If they were attacking they can still potentially move and if they were casting a spell they choose a legal target they have line of effect to.
+1 to this.
I would like to see a ruling that there is not enough time between spell completion and effect for an immediate action. Immediate actions could still be used during spell casting, but the choice would have to be made before targeting.
Readied actions could still be used for the cool effects described above, only immediate actions would be affected.
Totally disagree.
Rules support:an immediate action can be performed at any time—even if it's not your turn
Casting takes time, therefore immediate actions can be performed during casting.
What is not clear is what happens at the completion of casting, does targeting and effect take time. If it happens instantaneously then there is no time for an immediate action.
|
|
As I posted above, immediate actions do not give the right to interrupt others actions. Once someone starts casting, it is too late to use your immediate action, unless the text of the spell/feat explicitly states otherwise. Emergency Force Sphere does not give you the ability to interrupt casting, only to cast it on someone else's turn.
I don't think I agree with this given the context of readying to distract a spellcaster or counterspelling. The spell hasn't happened yet.
|
Pathfinder Society Lead Developer
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
As a note, once we start requesting a ruling on when someone can or cannot perform an immediate action with regards to another effect, we venture beyond what the Pathfinder Society team would address in any ruling; that's an overarching consideration that is much better addressed by the Pathfinder Design Team and (I imagine) its FAQ process.