Well i so far have a conjuration specialist truly enjoy the transposition spells in my game, he really enjoys them, as do I. That and greater slide, and dimension hop/step and he is the chess master of the battlefield. No major breaks so far, but my group always used the spell compendium without alot of difficulty. Only specific spell i have done any changes to so far is ray of stupidity in which i added a will save for half since a player now wishes to take it.
Speaking of the Orb spells, would it be balanced for a Rogue/Sorcerer to take one of the Lesser Orb Of __ spells? I'm only asking because I want a spell I can sneak attack with that isn't a cantrip.
(Halfling Rogue taking a level of Sorcerer(Celestial) soon, if you're curious.)
EDIT: Also, let's keep this derail as short as possible, alright?
Speaking of the Orb spells, would it be balanced for a Rogue/Sorcerer to take one of the Lesser Orb Of __ spells? I'm only asking because I want a spell I can sneak attack with that isn't a cantrip.There's another Spell Compendium thread right now which has been derailed with orb and direct damage discussion. Maybe ask there? The Orb argument is old enough to be in grade school now. :/
There is? Shoot. Well, this derail was shorter than I expected. Carry on.
We've used several of the entangling spells (kelpstrand, entangling staff, some forceweb spell). We modified all of them to parallel the way web now works.
Only specific spell i have done any changes to so far is ray of stupidity in which i added a will save for half since a player now wishes to take it.How does giving it a will save help? Did experience prompt that, or theoretical abuses? Also, what level ranges do you play at?
I love the level 1 Transposition spell (whose name completely escapes me), but my group also plays with the little-observed rule that helpless creatures are willing. Teleporting out of a grapple and leaving some dying mook in your place is highly entertaining.
It definately helps, and it was experience that drove my to change it. Ray of stupidity will one shot most magical beasts and animals, and can really cripple int based spell casters. Ive used and seen it used in this effect. And for a ray specialist its pretty easy to pull off. It also stays really strong as you go up in level. So like ray of enfeeblement i think a save for half is in order. Its an enchantment spell so that should be in my view a will save.
Speaking of the Orb spells, would it be balanced for a Rogue/Sorcerer to take one of the Lesser Orb Of __ spells? I'm only asking because I want a spell I can sneak attack with that isn't a cantrip.There's another Spell Compendium thread right now which has been derailed with orb and direct damage discussion. Maybe ask there? The Orb argument is old enough to be in grade school now. :/
Okay, on topic. One spell I've noticed as ridiculously obnoxious is Kelpstrand. Whether you use 3.5 or PF grappling rules, it rapidly outscales the grappling defenses of nearly anyone. On top of that, you get one strand per three caster levels and you can just stack them all on one target. If it's something that can't act while grappling (and most casters in PF cannot) and it doesn't have Freedom of Movement up, it's done.
It says one target per 3 levels. Those rules have never been used to target one person multiple time, but I do agree the grapple check is ridiculous.
|
Another one, while I'm here. Miasma of Entropy. It's not overpowered, just badly-written and super weird. It has a fortitude half save...with no explanation what a "half" result constitutes, since it destroys things outright. But that's okay, because near as I can tell all it does is destroy the clothing of everyone in a 30' cone, unless it's magical or made of metal (or polyester I guess). What on earth do you do with this spell?
Be a pervert?
Get arrested for being a pervert?
Get a impromptu orgy going down?
It says one target per 3 levels. Those rules have never been used to target one person multiple time, but I do agree the grapple check is ridiculous.It also says further down that you can target one target multiple times. It's rather poorly written, admittedly.
Ok, I see it now. It does say that, but in different words. They should have a subsection to state it broke that rule.
Poor editing the legacy of WoTC.
Another one, while I'm here. Miasma of Entropy. It's not overpowered, just badly-written and super weird. It has a fortitude half save...with no explanation what a "half" result constitutes, since it destroys things outright. But that's okay, because near as I can tell all it does is destroy the clothing of everyone in a 30' cone, unless it's magical or made of metal (or polyester I guess). What on earth do you do with this spell?
Well, it will stick now almost naked spellcasters into the square they occupied when you casted the spell. Their spell component pouch just rotted away (DM might even rule that is including all natural spell components). So if they want to cast anything they first have to grab the necessary spell component from the ground ;-)
Wooden weapons would also be gone I guess? Wooden divine focus perhaps?
Bolt of Glory (IIRC), caster level/d12 damage to outsiders. Ouch. The funny thing is that there are two versions of this spell floating around, the other does caster level/d6.
It's restricted to outsider that are evil to get the 1d12/lvl. If they are not evil or elemental it does 1d12/2 levels. It also has SR. I think its restriction balance it out. If it did 1d12 to everyone, that might be different. The spell is also short range which puts you within charging distance, if there is a path between you and the opponent. The SC version would be the official one if it was published after the other book.
In our current campaign, both my character (ftr/wiz) and the other arcane caster (evoker) has gotten GM approval to pick selected spells from SC.
I use Slide for moving about friend and foe alike (worked nicely for pulling the downed paladin out of harms way), and plan on getting Greater Slide. I'm also looking very much forward to tossing my elven Curve Blade around using Whirling Blade.
The evoker is playing a pure blaster, and likes to use Snowball Swarm as as his favorite low-level AoE spell, a habit from 3.5 it looks like he's continueing in Pathfinder.
I played a level 13 sorcerer in a PbEM campaign, and I loved Ruin Delver's Fortune. The DM hated it, though; in fact I think he hated all immediate action spells, but that one in particular.
He wasn't crazy about Craft Magic Tattoo either, since it added a bunch of extra fiddly little +1 and +2 bonuses for cheap.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Ok, fun spells I've used.
Defenestrating Sphere.
Spells that I didn't use because they were broken.
Phantasmal assaliants. -4 to int and CHa if they make their save? -8 if they fail? And it's damage.
Ray of stupidity. Make it a penalty and it's balanced.
(from Frostburn) Shivering Touch. I stopped using it after the DM sent us against a red dragon. It failed its SR. It's not fun to send in the pseudodragon familiar to shivering touch a target. Well it's fun for the caster, the rest of the party, not so much. You know it's bad when they don't include it in the SC.
Ok, fun spells I've used.
Defenestrating Sphere.
Spells that I didn't use because they were broken.
Phantasmal assaliants. -4 to int and CHa if they make their save? -8 if they fail? And it's damage.
Ray of stupidity. Make it a penalty and it's balanced.
(from Frostburn) Shivering Touch. I stopped using it after the DM sent us against a red dragon. It failed its SR. It's not fun to send in the pseudodragon familiar to shivering touch a target. Well it's fun for the caster, the rest of the party, not so much. You know it's bad when they don't include it in the SC.
I nerfed Shivering Touch too after learning about it on the WotC boards. It became famous for pimpslapping dragons.
|
I nerfed Shivering Touch too after learning about it on the WotC boards. It became famous for pimpslapping dragons.
I had much the same experience with Touch of Golden Ice from BoED. Evil creatures failing a Fort save take 1d6+ the creatures Cha bonus in Dex damage.
My epic group was waiting for the DM, so we threw our characters against a CR 56 dragon from the Everquest d20 Monsters of Norrath. It had a 7 Dex and 50-ish Cha. I won by repeated touch attacks until it rolled a one.
</derail>
Well i so far have a conjuration specialist truly enjoy the transposition spells in my game, he really enjoys them, as do I. That and greater slide, and dimension hop/step and he is the chess master of the battlefield. No major breaks so far, but my group always used the spell compendium without alot of difficulty. Only specific spell i have done any changes to so far is ray of stupidity in which i added a will save for half since a player now wishes to take it.
I'll second this notion. One of the games I'm playing in is an Eberron campaign that we've recently switched over to Pathfinder, but the Spell Compendium is in play. I'm playing a Warmage and happened to pick up Benign Transposition as one of my Advanced Learning spells. It's definitely great when needing to transpose allies in situations where someone's injured severely, surprise a mook by moving a weak PC with a more powerful one, or moving between different heights or across a chasm by transposing with another PC who is more skilled at climbing / jumping.
One spell I particularly dislike (that many people love) is Assay Spell Resistance. If there's an irritating problem with the game (e.g. so many high-level creatures have SR), then I'd prefer to make changes to the game rather than creating an irritating solution (e.g. you can basically ignore SR checks at the cost of a spell slot).
|
Speaking of the Orb spells, would it be balanced for a Rogue/Sorcerer to take one of the Lesser Orb Of __ spells? I'm only asking because I want a spell I can sneak attack with that isn't a cantrip.
(Halfling Rogue taking a level of Sorcerer(Celestial) soon, if you're curious.)
EDIT: Also, let's keep this derail as short as possible, alright?
For melee touch sneak attacks, I recommend shocking grasp. (Particularly combined with invisibility, but it doesn't look like you're going to dip deep enough into sorcerer for that.)
If you want to spellsniper, I recommend your celestial sorcerer's heavenly fire spell-like ability.
Derail complete.
.
.
.
.
Other spells I have recollection using:
- Blades of Fire - melee weapon does +1d8 fire dmg for 1 round
- Fist of Stone - for a minute duration, one of your hands turn into a stonefist that gains a +6 STR bonus and gain a slam attack (no more than 1/round)
- Fireburst - creatures within 10 feet take 1d8/level fire damage (max 5d8). Great when you're getting mobbed on from multiple attackers in melee range
- Darkway - Create temporary unbreakable bridge of force 5' wide, 1 inch thick, and up to 20' per level supporting up to 200lb/level. Duration of 1 round/level. Good to get multiple individuals across a chasm or river quickly
- Whirling Blade - Hurled slashing weapon magically attacks all foes in 60' line. You can also substitute your STR modifier with either CHA or INT on the weapon's attack and damage rolls. Weapon deals damage just as you've swung it in melee including any bonuses from ability scores or feats. Yowza! Makes me feel like Thor as the weapon returns to your grasp
One spell I particularly dislike (that many people love) is Assay Spell Resistance. If there's an irritating problem with the game (e.g. so many high-level creatures have SR), then I'd prefer to make changes to the game rather than creating an irritating solution (e.g. you can basically ignore SR checks at the cost of a spell slot).
I don't have a problem with a spell that lets you focus in and enable you to beat your opponent's spell resistance. I think taking some time to batter down your opponent's defenses against magic fits in with the fantasy genre.
What I don't like is the swift action casting time. I believe it should take time to batter down those defenses.
I'd like swift action spells on bard, paladin, and ranger spell lists (and the duskblade if I ever move that over to PF) to enhance their fighting abilities and such, but I'd like to keep most of them off the full caster lists...
Phantasmal assaliants. -4 to int and CHa if they make their save? -8 if they fail? And it's damage.
In Complete Arcane, they did 4 points of damage to Int and Dex, 2 for a failed save. I can't imagine why they doubled the damage in the SC. How a 2nd level spell should be doing 16 points of combined stat damage, 8 on a successful save, is beyond me.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
In Complete Arcane, they did 4 points of damage to Int and Dex, 2 for a failed save. I can't imagine why they doubled the damage in the SC. How a 2nd level spell should be doing 16 points of combined stat damage, 8 on a successful save, is beyond me.
Phantasmal assaliants. -4 to int and CHa if they make their save? -8 if they fail? And it's damage.
I misremembered, you're right it is Dex, not Cha. That's worse in some ways.
[Putting a will save on Ray of Stupidity] definately helps, and it was experience that drove my to change it. Ray of stupidity will one shot most magical beasts and animals, and can really cripple int based spell casters. Ive used and seen it used in this effect. And for a ray specialist its pretty easy to pull off. It also stays really strong as you go up in level. So like ray of enfeeblement i think a save for half is in order. Its an enchantment spell so that should be in my view a will save.Well, I was asking less if it helped and more how it helped. It seems like it's still a trump card against low-int animals and magical beasts, who tend to have less than great will saves. Are you just writing off the fact that there are other will save-or-dies that wreck them so one more isn't a big deal?
Exactly, there are already save or lose spells at that level, several of them, the problem I had was that ray of stupidity was mostly just win. Heck at higher levels you could split it and take out many humanoids with one shot. The save means the monsters have the same chance as they do against, sleep, charm, calm animal, color spray, glitterdust etc, since halving the int damage usually means most things wont drop in one hit. Its still a very good spell in lots of situations, but its not a gauranteed win button. I remember when I once took out a half orc level 14 black gaurd with a split ray of stupidity. 4th level spell slot took out a level 14 npc in one shot (for the record he had a 8 int). It was that day my group re-evaluated the spell.
|
|
I think, as with most 3.5 books, the Spell Compendium is completely fine for Pathfinder, but all spells should be judged on a case-by-case basis for problems or inconsistencies. Most of the spells listed here I honestly think are fine. If they're fair game for PCs, remember, they're fair game for the DM as well.
Delay Death seems fine to me because it only affects one creature and is a 4th-level spell. You aren't giving it to the entire party, and if it becomes too much of a crutch there are plenty of ways for the DM to bypass it. Remember, it only allows you to delay death from hit point damage. And if the cleric wants to waste four to six 4th-level spell slots on a way to maybe or maybe not stop anyone from dying, so be it. I always thought Assay Spell Resistance was fine too. I'm big on problem-and-response gaming, though. The DM provides roadblocks and the prepared PC bulldozes through them. Both Assay Spell Resistance and Delay Death fall into that camp.
Miasma of Entropy is weird, but seems harmless. Just don't use it would be my advice to any PCs.
Shivering Touch, while incredibly silly, isn't in Spell Compendium, so I'm not going to worry about it. I do think it holds a special place as one of the few truly justifiably ban-able spells in the game, though.
And somebody mentioned Benign Transposition, which is one of my favourite spells too. I honestly think the Spell Compendium's biggest strength is its wealth of interesting combat teleportation spells. Knight's Move is another interesting one with a lot of fun applications. It's the spells like these that make me love this book.
There's also the much debated Wraithstrike, which I personally think is completely fine and okay for most games. Even the old arcane warrior with Power Attack/Wraithstrike doesn't strike me as a big deal. Swift actions and 2nd-level spells both are at a premium for such a build. I have a 3.5 game that hasn't made the switch to Pathfinder (yet) in which I play a duskblade with a DM-approved modified spell list to give him options from the Spell Compendium, including Wraithstrike, Assay Spell Resistance, and all the cool teleportation spells. It's an unbelievably fun character to play. Probably my favourite character I've ever made, actually.
The thing I noticed about Spell Compendium's interactions with Pathfinder that seems most puzzling to me so far is with regard to the changes Pathfinder made to the concept of darkness/magical darkness. What does everyone think about Ebon Eyes and its interaction with Deeper Darkness? That's the big problem that has come up in my Pathfinder game so far. We're not sure how to handle the darkness rules inconsistencies.
I think, as with most 3.5 books, the Spell Compendium is completely fine for Pathfinder, but all spells should be judged on a case-by-case basis for problems or inconsistencies. Most of the spells listed here I honestly think are fine. If they're fair game for PCs, remember, they're fair game for the DM as well.
Delay Death seems fine to me because it only affects one creature and is a 4th-level spell. You aren't giving it to the entire party, and if it becomes too much of a crutch there are plenty of ways for the DM to bypass it. Remember, it only allows you to delay death from hit point damage. And if the cleric wants to waste four to six 4th-level spell slots on a way to maybe or maybe not stop anyone from dying, so be it. I always thought Assay Spell Resistance was fine too. I'm big on problem-and-response gaming, though. The DM provides roadblocks and the prepared PC bulldozes through them. Both Assay Spell Resistance and Delay Death fall into that camp.
Miasma of Entropy is weird, but seems harmless. Just don't use it would be my advice to any PCs.
Shivering Touch, while incredibly silly, isn't in Spell Compendium, so I'm not going to worry about it. I do think it holds a special place as one of the few truly justifiably ban-able spells in the game, though.
And somebody mentioned Benign Transposition, which is one of my favourite spells too. I honestly think the Spell Compendium's biggest strength is its wealth of interesting combat teleportation spells. Knight's Move is another interesting one with a lot of fun applications. It's the spells like these that make me love this book.
There's also the much debated Wraithstrike, which I personally think is completely fine and okay for most games. Even the old arcane warrior with Power Attack/Wraithstrike doesn't strike me as a big deal. Swift actions and 2nd-level spells both are at a premium for such a build. I have a 3.5 game that hasn't made the switch to Pathfinder (yet) in which I play a duskblade with a DM-approved modified spell list to...
It's intended to work for magical darkness, but not magical darkness so I would allow it to work for both darkness spells.
There's also the much debated Wraithstrike, which I personally think is completely fine and okay for most games. Even the old arcane warrior with Power Attack/Wraithstrike doesn't strike me as a big deal. Swift actions and 2nd-level spells both are at a premium for such a build.
Whoah. How did that one get past me? Oh yes, I know - I've only played either a duskblade, a warmage, and a bard thus far in the campaigns where the SC has been present.
Note that Pathfinder Power Attack explicitly does not work on touch attacks, so wraithstrike isn't quite as strong as it used to be.
Note that Pathfinder Power Attack explicitly does not work on touch attacks, so wraithstrike isn't quite as strong as it used to be.
Thanks for the info. I had not noticed that part.
Power attack may explicitly exclude touch attacks, but wraithstrike doesn't make the attack a touch attack, per se. It just says attacks are resolved as melee touch attacks. I'd say the spell works fine with the PF power attack. The spell basically provides an exception to the normal rules of weapon combat--hitting the full AC--and I see no real reason it shouldn't do the same in PF.
Power attack may explicitly exclude touch attacks, but wraithstrike doesn't make the attack a touch attack, per se. It just says attacks are resolved as melee touch attacks. I'd say the spell works fine with the PF power attack. The spell basically provides an exception to the normal rules of weapon combat--hitting the full AC--and I see no real reason it shouldn't do the same in PF.
Part of the resolution of an attack is determining damage.
|
|
Bolt of Glory is situational, but the SpC took it from a Cleric Domain spell and made it available as a regular old cleric spell. I hated that Spell in the STAP because our Cleric took the Demonwrecker PrC which at it's final level allowed him to bypass an evil outsiders SR, making that spell an automatic go to.
Shivering touch is in a similar boat (even if it's not in the SpC) in that it's intended for use in a Frostfell based game, not your everyday ordinary campaign. Most creatures in Frostfell games are immune or resistant to Cold and thus the spell isn't great, but take into the regular world of D&D and it's a killer.
I disliked Blood to Water and Moonbolt, but that's mainly when maximized via Divine Meta-magic, so it's a combo hate. Glad Divine metamagic is gone in PF.
--Jingle Bell Vrock!
As for my own experiences at the table, it's my playgroup's general consensus that the spell extract water elemental is the coolest spell in the game, ever. Sure, it's a fort-half single-target damage-dealer that allows SR, and it doesn't work on anything with the fire subtype, but, well, come on! It draws all the water out of your target's body and makes a water elemental out of it!
We've never had any major problems using spells from the Spell Compendium. I use a lot of the Bard spells from there frequently -- inspirational boost, bladeweave, sonic shield, grace, sirine's grace, etc, are all excellent and fairly well balanced.
Power attack may explicitly exclude touch attacks, but wraithstrike doesn't make the attack a touch attack, per se. It just says attacks are resolved as melee touch attacks. I'd say the spell works fine with the PF power attack. The spell basically provides an exception to the normal rules of weapon combat--hitting the full AC--and I see no real reason it shouldn't do the same in PF.
The intent is pretty clear. Anyone can read a rule differently than what it says if they want to bad enough.
Touch Attacks: Some attacks completely disregard armor, including shields and natural armor—the aggressor need only touch a foe for such an attack to take full effect. In these cases, the attacker makes a touch attack roll (either ranged or melee). When you are the target of a touch attack, your AC doesn't include any armor bonus, shield bonus, or natural armor bonus. All other modifiers, such as your size modifier, Dexterity modifier, and deflection bonus (if any) apply normally. Some creatures have the ability to make incorporeal touch attacks. These attacks bypass solid objects, such as armor and shields, by passing through them. Incorporeal touch attacks work similarly to normal touch attacks except that they also ignore cover bonuses. Incorporeal touch attacks do not ignore armor bonuses granted by force effects, such as mage armor and bracers of armor.
Wraithstrike according to the definition shown above is a touch attack.
Regarding spells like the one mentioned that was previously a clerical domain spell, there were several spells from Forgotten Realms sources that were included in a similar manner that kind of screwed with the idea behind them.
In the Player's Guide to Faerun, initiate feats were introduced, which gave divine casters two or three spells specific to their faith. When the appeared in the Spell Compendium they had no such restriction, and as such, spells that used to only appear on the spell list of one faith's divine casters, and still cost them a feat, now were available to all divine casters that qualified.
On top of that, some of them even ended up getting upgraded by having swift action casting times and the like.
Its neither here nor there, but I liked it much better in 3.0 when the spells were just given to a particular faith instead of requiring a feat, but the point remains the same, that they were spells native to a given divine tradition.
|
Its neither here nor there, but I liked it much better in 3.0 when the spells were just given to a particular faith instead of requiring a feat, but the point remains the same, that they were spells native to a given divine tradition.
This is the flavor I like to use for non-core books. That is, everything in the core rules is standard. No one is surprised to find a potion of cure light wounds or to see a mage cast fireball or to know of an arcane archer.
All non-core material is an exception. The spells in the Spell Compendium are less widely known, newly created, or specific to a specific region/culture/faith etc. Same thing goes for items from the Magic Item Compendium or prestige classes from splatbooks.
If my players want something from a non-core book, I'm usually pretty generous, but they always need to ask. Core is automatically allowed, anything else is allowed only on a per-request basis.
That's the approach I took in 3.x, and it's the approach I'll continue to use in PFRPG.
I think, as with most 3.5 books, the Spell Compendium is completely fine for Pathfinder, but all spells should be judged on a case-by-case basis for problems or inconsistencies. Most of the spells listed here I honestly think are fine. If they're fair game for PCs, remember, they're fair game for the DM as well.
Great points. Always remember Rule Zero!
I have a 3.5 game that hasn't made the switch to Pathfinder (yet) in which I play a duskblade with a DM-approved modified spell list...
Would you mind sharing that list?