Why do certain spells still exist?

[Cevah]

SorrySleeping wrote:

My group has yet to finish a single AP, only recently hitting level 7 on Reign of Winter, calling an end to Wrath of the Righteous on level 8, and a homebrew campaign that ended in a total party kill/retiring. It would be nice if d20pfsrd listed this somewhere.

Also maybe just because I haven't seen high level play, but don't most of the spells get limited by the cost/cast time? Simulacrum has a 12 hour cast time. That is something that has to be prepped hugely in advance and it costs seems to add up.

I do agree on teleporting, since I've had it destroy more than a few things in WotR and a one-shot I made while members were away.

While the Simulacrum spell does have a casting time of 12 hours, its effects can be duplicated by a Wish spell as a standard action. You pay 25K for a creature with up to 20 HD. If you allow Limited Wish to do the 5th level version that the summoner has, then you pay 10K for up to 2 HD. It also has a standard action casting. With either version of wish, you can go over the HD cap if you pay 500/HD over the 25K/10K of the wish spells.

When you can cast Wish, gaining 25K is not that hard. If you have the time, you can make lots of money to fuel making lots of sims. With each standard action cast of Wish, you get another 20 HD creature to augment your power.

If you can't wait, you can cast the 12 hour version more cheaply, but it does make for a long day.

/cevah

[doc the grey]

Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:

doc the grey wrote:

To get back on the topic of spells that shouldn't exist I'd like to add Haste to that list. I know it seems like an odd choice but a spell that gives nothing but buffs to the whole party with no downsides and is always combat useful like that is kind of too good and end's up being something EVERYONE brings vs. something that is useful in certain situations and not others. It's basically an essential everyday must bring in almost every conceivable group and it basically turns turn 1 into who can pop the spell the fastest and that shouldn't be the case. I'd love to see a rewrite that either throws some drawbacks into the spell like Time Shudder or have it removed and its abilities incorporated into the basic designs of the game.

I like 5e's version which, should the spell end, causes a creature affected by the spell to miss a turn from exhaustion. Of course, 5e has spell concentration (basically, maintaining a spell passively but limited to only one spell at a time, but it can be broken by attacking the spellcaster or causing them to be violently shaken about, like through grappling and earthquakes), so you can cause this to occur early by ending concentration. It allowed for some response to an otherwise really powerful spell.

Problem is, removing or reworking haste is probably hurting your martials more than your spellcasters. Which I can't advocate in any way unless the difference is basically negligible at best from system reworks.

Agreed that it is likely to hurt martials more than spellcasters, but I feel like that is an issue that can and should be fixed through other patches and increase in complexity (and therefore options) for martials in the future. It speaks to problems when you have an entire half of the player options dependent upon a single action of the other half but nothing on the other side to balance them out.

[Blackwaltzomega]

doc the grey wrote:

Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:

doc the grey wrote:

To get back on the topic of spells that shouldn't exist I'd like to add Haste to that list. I know it seems like an odd choice but a spell that gives nothing but buffs to the whole party with no downsides and is always combat useful like that is kind of too good and end's up being something EVERYONE brings vs. something that is useful in certain situations and not others. It's basically an essential everyday must bring in almost every conceivable group and it basically turns turn 1 into who can pop the spell the fastest and that shouldn't be the case. I'd love to see a rewrite that either throws some drawbacks into the spell like Time Shudder or have it removed and its abilities incorporated into the basic designs of the game.

I like 5e's version which, should the spell end, causes a creature affected by the spell to miss a turn from exhaustion. Of course, 5e has spell concentration (basically, maintaining a spell passively but limited to only one spell at a time, but it can be broken by attacking the spellcaster or causing them to be violently shaken about, like through grappling and earthquakes), so you can cause this to occur early by ending concentration. It allowed for some response to an otherwise really powerful spell.

Problem is, removing or reworking haste is probably hurting your martials more than your spellcasters. Which I can't advocate in any way unless the difference is basically negligible at best from system reworks.

Agreed that it is likely to hurt martials more than spellcasters, but I feel like that is an issue that can and should be fixed through other patches and increase in complexity (and therefore options) for martials in the future. It speaks to problems when you have an entire half of the player options dependent upon a single action of the other half but nothing on the other side to balance them out.

Arguably, we're already feeling some of the problems of that thinking.

IIRC, one of the justifications for the full attack consuming your move action as well in 3rd Edition was that "cast Haste on the martial" was just plain good tactics for nearly any party, and 3rd Edition haste gave additional actions that allowed the buffed martial to move and make their full attacks. Boots of Speed were even more invaluable as a result, because that let the martial have haste on tap whenever they needed it if they were wise with saving up rounds.

Unfortunately, a spell giving additional actions in an edition where magic users were extremely powerful meant that a caster could just make THEMSELVES even more broken with it, so Haste was adjusted for 3.5 and Pathfinder and didn't give additional actions, which prevented spellcasters from cheesing their casting out with it but undercutting one of the simplest ways of playing a martial whose tactics involved moving around the battlefield without losing all but one attack.

[Purple Overkill]

Hm... agreed, yes. Part of it might stem from the "class levels as building blocks" mentality, because it could have been easy to use a line on Haste like "For Fighters..."

[Garbage-Tier Waifu]

Honestly, martials should be readily able to get pounce :P

[Purple Overkill]

Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:

Honestly, martials should be readily able to get pounce :P

Might surprise you, but I actually disagree (and I´m all in favor of martial classes).

We lack a middle ground. Being able to do a full attack is also a reward for setting up a tactical position that enables you to do that. Just handling out pounce cheapens any kind of tactical ability on the players part. Offering up "Pounce" as a third option for Full BAB classes to build upon, maybe integrating CMB, would be more interesting.

[AM BARBARIAN]

BARBARIAN NOTE THAT POUNCE AM MIDDLE GROUND.

OPPOSITE GROUND AM 'CAN MOVE AND FULL ATTACK ALWAYS,' WHICH AM SOMETHING THAT NOT GENERALLY GET GIVEN AS CLASS. THAT AM PROPER THIRD OPTION, BARBARIAN AM FAN OF MOVING AND THEN SMASH.

[Chromantic Durgon <3]

I agree that Simalcrum and blood money are not very good for the game in their current state the others don't bother me too much and I think part of the reason is a lot of the objections are PVP based and I'm not really that bothered about that.

Clone - is just getting a resurrect quicker if you die, but you lose your gear in the process, which you can then get back, if its a TPK then its probably permanent loss of gear. I don't see this as particularly insane.

Emergency Force Sphere - I don't think this spell is as bad as it seems for two reasons, you can't use it flatfooted so if you sneak up on the caster they're still screwed, second if they used their swift action they can't use it, so basically if a caster ever goes all out their sacrifice their defense, a bit like charge and rage lowering AC but more meaningful, also once they're in the bubble they can't like cast out of it right? or I am wrong about that so it's just a place to cast your breath and basically wait for the aggro to move to another target, like a martial then you DD out and carry on. I can see it being a problem in PVP but again I don't care that much about PVP.

Teleport - eh Teleport is in my opinion one of those spells that kind of defines high level play, making the casting time longer sounds fine to me but again the reasoning sounds pvp based so I wouldn't call it essential.

[Hypothetical God Wizard]

Sneak up? On a wizard? Excuse me I need to sit down, I'm laughing too hard.

Sweetheart there are three things I need you to remember.

Foresight. Divination arcane school power. Contact other Plane.

I'll know when I'm about to be attacked. It's whether the attacker knows that I know, and that's when the game truly gets interesting.

[AM BARBARIAN]

BARBARIAN FIND THAT AM IMPOSSIBLE TO KNOW IF ABOUT TO BE ATTACKED IF BARBARIAN HIMSELF AM NOT SURE IF CASTY AM ABOUT TO BE ATTACKED.

ALL AM TAKING TO BE UNPREDICTABLE AM TO JUST NOT BE SURE WHAT HECK AM DOING ANY GIVEN TIME OF DAY. IF FATE AM CONCEPT, CONSIDER CONCEPT SUNDERED. DC OF REALITY AM NOT THAT HIGH EITHER.

[Elminster, Rockstar of Wizardry]

glares at the competition. Takes another drag off his pipe.

Lhaeo!! Pack my bags! It's time for a crossover!

[Plausible Pseudonym]

Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

Emergency Force Sphere - I don't think this spell is as bad as it seems for two reasons, you can't use it flatfooted so if you sneak up on the caster they're still screwed, second if they used their swift action they can't use it,

Not true. Immediate actions use up next turn's swift action, not your saved swift action from the previous turn.

[Purple Overkill]

Hypothetical God Wizard wrote:

Sneak up? On a wizard? Excuse me I need to sit down, I'm laughing too hard.

Sweetheart there are three things I need you to remember.

Foresight. Divination arcane school power. Contact other Plane.

I'll know when I'm about to be attacked. It's whether the attacker knows that I know, and that's when the game truly gets interesting.

Gotta agree with Ambee on this: If I don´t know that I´ll attack you, all theorycraft is not gonna help you on this. Don´t try to talk all pvp basing it on pve tools, that´ll never gonna work.

[Envall]

The SRD kinda broke a rule I think the system really benefited from.

Content only exist if you actually have the book with you.

When actually bringing the splatbook with you was the only way to get to use a feat or spell in it, it made everything lot easier to control since (atleast in my experience) you could just identify problem books and people rarely had the money to get new ones. It also created a slow drip of new options and only rules that people brought along mattered. And those books always came with context why the option exists.

SRD is huge and vast, but is a pain in the ass to actually browse.
You can just open the list of general feats and have your eyes glaze over the hyperlinks.

[Garbage-Tier Waifu]

Envall wrote:

The SRD kinda broke a rule I think the system really benefited from.

Content only exist if you actually have the book with you.

When actually bringing the splatbook with you was the only way to get to use a feat or spell in it, it made everything lot easier to control since (atleast in my experience) you could just identify problem books and people rarely had the money to get new ones. It also created a slow drip of new options and only rules that people brought along mattered. And those books always came with context why the option exists.

SRD is huge and vast, but is a pain in the ass to actually browse.
You can just open the list of general feats and have your eyes glaze over the hyperlinks.

I don't really think I agree with that, particularly since I think an evolving SRD means A) the hobby is much more open and accessible without massive cash investment (as a poor college student but also as a paying customer, I appreciate this a lot) and B) additional content beyond the scope of rulebooks and including the rulebooks means that the system is being frequently changed, and generally for the better.

Barring a few...notable exceptions (*cough*Pact Wizard*cough*).

Anyway, the SRD is a godsend and I'm pretty sure I'd enjoy the system less if I was expected to limit myself to a few books. Particularly when the content is sitting right there, open to everyone.

Because if I was limited, I'd just split the game in half with a Core only spellcaster. Core alone is practically the root of Pathfinder's many evils.

Also, google and Ctrl+F are quite valuable tools in this modern age of web browsing.

[Nezzmith]

Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:

Core alone is practically the root of Pathfinder's many evils.

The truth.

Paizo has learned to dial back on spells for the most part. Only the legacy spells of yesteryear still haunt the ever-desired "balance" of the game and they can all be found in the Core.

[PossibleCabbage]

Personally, I never really saw the "you have to own the book to use the rule" as anything other than a guideline for organized play. If it was a broadly understood rule for home games, it would be bad for the game.

I mean, specifically when you started playing Pathfinder did you run out and buy all the books and then decide that you wanted to play? Or did someone who had the books rope you into a game? Since that second one is more or less how I've been introduced to like 80% of the tabletop RPGs I've played.

Having the rules available in a public reference means that when person A is trying to get together B, C, D, and E for a game they're running they don't need to loan out the core rules in sequence so that everyone can make a character (since asking people to buy something before they can play isn't going to help your sales pitch as a GM).

I mean, the only reason I bought the books I bought was because I could try out the game first. This is generally speaking a good policy, it's just that "everything in the SRD is fair game" might cause problems for the GM.

[Lord Foul II]

doc the grey wrote:

To get back on the topic of spells that shouldn't exist I'd like to add Haste to that list. I know it seems like an odd choice but a spell that gives nothing but buffs to the whole party with no downsides and is always combat useful like that is kind of too good and end's up being something EVERYONE brings vs. something that is useful in certain situations and not others. It's basically an essential everyday must bring in almost every conceivable group and it basically turns turn 1 into who can pop the spell the fastest and that shouldn't be the case. I'd love to see a rewrite that either throws some drawbacks into the spell like Time Shudder or have it removed and its abilities incorporated into the basic designs of the game.

I don't think haste is too bad, but as a former old school gamer I'd like to point out that in 2e the spell aged you by one year when you cast it

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I feel like the sort of high level wizard who engages in magical research to create new spells, you're going to be the sort of person who realizes how valuable "I know something you don't" is going to be in Wizard politics. That is, the thing that keeps any given high-level wizard from ruling the world is largely "they know better than to step on the toes of their peers"-- the mutually assured destruction theory of wizarding.

So if you create some spell that potentially gives you a significant advantage over your peers (Simulacrum lets them think they killed you, but you'd prefer they don't also know it, so when you kill them it's for real), you want to do everything in your power to keep it out of their hands. Certainly, espionage exists and works, but individual casters probably do not have the same resources at their disposal as whole countries, so how quickly this information disseminates is entirely within the purview of the GM.

Which is to say, Magical Non-Proliferation is a wholly realistic thing to model in your fantasy world.

to quote Terry Pratchett: the plural of wizard is a war

[Garbage-Tier Waifu]

Most PF characters would have withered into nothing by this point if that was how Haste worked today XD

[Ed Reppert]

Conversation:

Player: "This is a really cool spell, I think I'll take it."
GM: "Okay. Where are you going to get it?"
Player: "Um...."

True, the CRB does say the wizard picks his basic spell allotment, which can be interpreted as "it's up to the player what spells he knows". But there are numerical limits to that, and nothing says that the GM can't houserule adding other limitations such as "you must find a mentor willing to teach you the spell - for a price".

[Blackwaltzomega]

Ed Reppert wrote:

Conversation:

Player: "This is a really cool spell, I think I'll take it."
GM: "Okay. Where are you going to get it?"
Player: "Um...."

True, the CRB does say the wizard picks his basic spell allotment, which can be interpreted as "it's up to the player what spells he knows". But there are numerical limits to that, and nothing says that the GM can't houserule adding other limitations such as "you must find a mentor willing to teach you the spell - for a price".

While I do think limiting wizards is a good idea I don't know that doing it in that way is the best idea. Among other things it opens the door to a slippery slope of "no, you can't learn a feat now, go find a knife-fighter NPC somewhere and pay him first" and other such nonsense. Some acceptable breaks from reality in the name of better play are probably to be borne, although I think the GM is well within his rights and probably playing as the game was meant to be played if he makes a wizard or alchemist who wants to jot down some spells beyond the allotment he gets from his class levels jump through some hoops.

[Firewarrior44]

That just seems like a case of over engineering the problem. You just ban the spell / feat / option instead of adding a contrived set of mechanics to make it impossible to acquire said spell / feat / option.

[Ed Reppert]

what if you don't want to ban it or make it impossible, but just make it difficult?

[Chromantic Durgon <3]

Plausible Pseudonym wrote:

Chromantic Durgon <3 wrote:

Emergency Force Sphere - I don't think this spell is as bad as it seems for two reasons, you can't use it flatfooted so if you sneak up on the caster they're still screwed, second if they used their swift action they can't use it,

Not true. Immediate actions use up next turn's swift action, not your saved swift action from the previous turn.

The more you know

That's nice, well yeah then it's just a case of the wizard having to leave his bubble or wait for it to expire and not get snuck up on (some wizards aren't divination specialists xD) that limits this spell.

Honestly displacement + mirror image before hand seems similarly annoying for martials. Not quite as bad but still pretty irritating.

[Cevah]

Lord Foul II wrote:

doc the grey wrote:

To get back on the topic of spells that shouldn't exist I'd like to add Haste to that list. ...

I don't think haste is too bad, but as a former old school gamer I'd like to point out that in 2e the spell aged you by one year when you cast it

2nd Ed Haste:

Haste (Alteration)

Range: 60 yds.
Components: V, S, M
Duration: 3 rds. + 1 rd./level
Casting Time: 3
Area of Effect: 40-ft. cube, 1 creature/level
Saving Throw: None

When this spell is cast, each affected creature functions at double its normal movement and attack rates. A hasted creature gains a -2 initiative bonus. Thus, a creature moving at 6 and attacking once per round would move at 12 and attack twice per round. Spellcasting and spell effects are not sped up. The number of creatures that can be affected is equal to the caster's experience level; those creatures closest to the center of effect are affected first. All affected by haste must be in the designated area of effect. Note that this spell negates the effects of a slow spell. Additionally, this spell ages the recipient by one year, because of sped-up metabolic processes. This spell is not cumulative with itself or with other similar magic.

Its material component is a shaving of licorice root.

Almost. One year on each target. Dragons love you for it.

Also, it does not give additional actions, nor does it allow increased casting.

/cevah

[wraithstrike]

Purple Overkill wrote:

Garbage-Tier Waifu wrote:

Honestly, martials should be readily able to get pounce :P

Might surprise you, but I actually disagree (and I´m all in favor of martial classes).

We lack a middle ground. Being able to do a full attack is also a reward for setting up a tactical position that enables you to do that. Just handling out pounce cheapens any kind of tactical ability on the players part. Offering up "Pounce" as a third option for Full BAB classes to build upon, maybe integrating CMB, would be more interesting.

Any GM can negate a full round attack by not standing and trading unless you have an archer, and in cases where the PC is the better fighter it often makes sense to not allow the PC's to get in full round attack. However in the interest of fun GM's allow players to walk up and trade blows most of the time.

I see no issue with pounce being allowed, especially if you play with a more tactical GM, who has monsters realize "Maybe I should not stand and trade", after having 70%(don't get stuck on the number) of their hit points shaved off after one full attack.

[John Mechalas]

Cevah wrote:

Lord Foul II wrote:

doc the grey wrote:

To get back on the topic of spells that shouldn't exist I'd like to add Haste to that list. ...

I don't think haste is too bad, but as a former old school gamer I'd like to point out that in 2e the spell aged you by one year when you cast it

** spoiler omitted **

Almost. One year on each target. Dragons love you for it.

This dates back to AD&D. Other spells did it to you, too:

Magical Aging Causes
casting alter reality spell, 3 years
casting gate spell, 5 years
casting limited wish spell, 1 year
casting restoration spell, 2 years
casting resurrection spell, 3 years
casting wish spell, 3 years
imbibing a speed potion, 1 year
under a haste spell, 1 year

Elf wizards were really popular (edited to add: but they were limited to 11th level because arbitrary racial level limits)

[Dαedαlus]

John Mechalas wrote:

Cevah wrote:

Lord Foul II wrote:

doc the grey wrote:

To get back on the topic of spells that shouldn't exist I'd like to add Haste to that list. ...

I don't think haste is too bad, but as a former old school gamer I'd like to point out that in 2e the spell aged you by one year when you cast it

** spoiler omitted **

Almost. One year on each target. Dragons love you for it.

This dates back to AD&D. Other spells did it to you, too:

Magical Aging Causes
casting alter reality spell, 3 years
casting gate spell, 5 years
casting limited wish spell, 1 year
casting restoration spell, 2 years
casting resurrection spell, 3 years
casting wish spell, 3 years
imbibing a speed potion, 1 year
under a haste spell, 1 year

Elf wizards were really popular.

I can only imagine how fast dragons would grow, and how powerful they must be. I mean, if I were a 2e dragon, you know I'd be casting every haste I could manage before bedtime. That would be legitimately terrifying, you know? Barely escape your fight with a young adult dragon, and when you return the following week to finish it off, it's already ancient.

[Ring_of_Gyges]

I'd like to push back on the idea that Rise of the Runelords contains some special contextual information that Blood Money should be impossible to generally obtain.

The words "blood money" appear exactly 8 times in the 343 page RotRL PDF. One of those is in Karzoug's statblock where he has a wand of blood money and the other seven are in the spell's statblock in the appendix. That's it. Two locations, named in Karzoug's statblock and the actual spell description in the appendix.

The appendix doesn't say *anything* about the spells listed being more powerful than regular spells, unavailable to sorcerers, special rewards for completing the AP, balanced by their rarity, or anything like that.

The context for the new spells, in it's entirety, is a heading "New Spells" followed by the text "Despite having been originally invented by wizards, these spells also function for other classes." That's it.

The only other thing plausibly describable as context is that the appendix section the "new spells" section appears in says "Appendix Seven: New Rules. This appendix presents rules for tracking sin points, details on Thassilonian magic, a new feat, and seven new spells designed by ancient Thassilonian wizards."

It's a bad spell, it's a broken spell, it's a spell that shouldn't be unleashed on anyone's game, publishing it was a mistake. Paizo publishes thousands of options, some percentage of them are going to be mistakes, it happens. Lets not pretend there is some special note in the AP that says it isn't available outside of Xin-Shalast.

[PossibleCabbage]

I think the point is more that-

A GM can make Blood Money manageable by making it virtually impossible to get (outside of RotRL perhaps completely impossible to get).

If you have players who are just looking through the SRD to find stuff, set guidelines like "If it's not from an RPG line book, the PDT wasn't responsible for it, so it might not have undergone the same level of scrutiny, so check with me first." Just point out that if the source doesn't have one of "Guide", "Ultimate", "Adventures", "Codex", or "Unchained" in the title it's a "check with me."

[Bill Dunn]

John Mechalas wrote:

This dates back to AD&D. Other spells did it to you, too:

Magical Aging Causes
casting alter reality spell, 3 years
casting gate spell, 5 years
casting limited wish spell, 1 year
casting restoration spell, 2 years
casting resurrection spell, 3 years
casting wish spell, 3 years
imbibing a speed potion, 1 year
under a haste spell, 1 year

Elf wizards were really popular (edited to add: but they were limited to 11th level because arbitrary racial level limits)

Well, that did kind of limit the ability to use those spells willy-nilly as an elf caster, didn't it? Maybe not so arbitrary...

[Bill Dunn]

Isonaroc wrote:

Going back to the OP, a lot of these spells exist as DM tools (simulacrum in particular), to give the DM options (within the rules, obviously the DM can just declare things, but having these spells gives them an understood method for achieving goals).

System mastery isn't just knowing what something does or how to maximize its power. It also includes the context in which it should be used...

[graystone]

Ring_of_Gyges: Your post mirrors mine. Nothing in the base material for Blood Money makes it unique or notes anything special about it: from access to power.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the point is more that-

A GM can make Blood Money manageable by making it virtually impossible to get (outside of RotRL perhaps completely impossible to get).

If you have players who are just looking through the SRD to find stuff, set guidelines like "If it's not from an RPG line book, the PDT wasn't responsible for it, so it might not have undergone the same level of scrutiny, so check with me first." Just point out that if the source doesn't have one of "Guide", "Ultimate", "Adventures", "Codex", or "Unchained" in the title it's a "check with me."

Core, despite it's "level of scrutiny", has some of the most disruptive material. So I don't really agree with the 'check unless it's a [blank] book. You also have an "RPG" book in the recent past that was HORRIBLY edited, to the point it's cover was a mistake, to get it out in time, so an extra level of 'scrutiny' is questionable. The only real difference IMO is that the non-hardback books see errata/FAQ much less often, not that the original material is inherently better balanced.

So "check with me" seems like a fine requirement, arbitrary restrictions seems unnecessary. If some material is an issue, rule on it: For instance, Swipe shouldn't be restricted because it's a spell that came out of the same book as Blood Money. Make something "virtually impossible to get" if there is an actual reason to do so, not because of the source it came from. [especially when the source material doesn't even suggest such a restriction]

[Rysky]

graystone wrote:

Ring_of_Gyges: Your post mirrors mine. Nothing in the base material for Blood Money makes it unique or notes anything special about it: from access to power.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I think the point is more that-

A GM can make Blood Money manageable by making it virtually impossible to get (outside of RotRL perhaps completely impossible to get).

If you have players who are just looking through the SRD to find stuff, set guidelines like "If it's not from an RPG line book, the PDT wasn't responsible for it, so it might not have undergone the same level of scrutiny, so check with me first." Just point out that if the source doesn't have one of "Guide", "Ultimate", "Adventures", "Codex", or "Unchained" in the title it's a "check with me."

Core, despite it's "level of scrutiny", has some of the most disruptive material. So I don't really agree with the 'check unless it's a [blank] book. You also have an "RPG" book in the recent past that was HORRIBLY edited, to the point it's cover was a mistake, to get it out in time, so an extra level of 'scrutiny' is questionable. The only real difference IMO is that the non-hardback books see errata/FAQ much less often, not that the original material is inherently better balanced.

So "check with me" seems like a fine requirement, arbitrary restrictions seems unnecessary. If some material is an issue, rule on it: For instance, Swipe shouldn't be restricted because it's a spell that came out of the same book as Blood Money. Make something "virtually impossible to get" if there is an actual reason to do so, not because of the source it came from. [especially when the source material doesn't even suggest such a restriction]

It suggests it in where it's placed and how it's obtained.

But yes this all boils down to "check with me."

[Gulthor]

Rysky wrote:

But yes this all boils down to "check with me."

Going further with this, I think it also boils down to a "Gentleman's Agreement" where players/the table agrees not too deliberately try to abuse the rules and break the game.

In our recent Iron Gods camapign, my alchemist took the full suite of Simulacrum discoveries. Greater Alchemical Simulacrum is disgustingly powerful.

My original plan for it was that I was going to make a clone of the Black Sovereign and we would end up becoming shadow puppeteers of Starfall, but then spoilers happened, and we ended up not needing to.

Instead, I used greater alchemical simulacrum to make 1/2 level "clones" of the party and gave them to their respective party member as gifts (which they each just sent off to take care of different projects). I used doppelganger simulacrum to keep an eye on things we had cooking in Torch, Scrapwall, and Smokewood Tower.

That was it.

Incredibly, insanely broken discovery. I had to actually convince myself it was okay to take it, because I knew how broken it was. Until I reminded myself that I wasn't going to use it that way. Ended up being one of the most fun, flavorful things I could have done.

[Ravingdork]

Yeah,any of these "broken" options can still be a lot of fun in the right group. Shame on those who would take them away and dictate how others should play the game.

[Blackwaltzomega]

Ravingdork wrote:

Yeah,any of these "broken" options can still be a lot of fun in the right group. Shame on those who would take them away and dictate how others should play the game.

I object to the notion that some of PF's options are fun even in the right group.

Dazing Spell, for example. The "right group" for that to be fun requires every member of that group to be the sort of player that enjoys stun-locking boss encounters to death.

Or Sacred Geometry, which is just giving a whole bunch of free power to somebody if they do a bit of math when they cast.

[ShroudedInLight]

I'd like to pop in to mention that the first page of this thread is discussing problem spells and then the next three pages are all arguments about Blood Money, spell availability, caster/martial disparity, and a touch of AM BARBARIAN.

Instead of rehashing the same subjects, again, how about we get back to questioning specific spells?

[Chromantic Durgon <3]

Not being able to conceive of the group that enjoys something doesn't mean there isn't one.

[graystone]

ShroudedInLight wrote:

Instead of rehashing the same subjects, again, how about we get back to questioning specific spells?

How is talking about a specific spell, blood magic, NOT talking about "specific spells"?

How is debating how you deal with such problem spells not on point for the thread? he asked if they are being willfully overlooked after all.
The OP themselves brought up caster/martial disparity, so it seems disingenuous to ask other posters to ignore it.

So, we're down to AM BARBARIAN...

[necromental]

AM BARBARIAN goes where he pleases.

[Flamephoenix182]

As many other people mentioned, unless your playing PFS, I fail to see how any option is an issue? Is my group the only one who talks about what type of campaign we would like to have and the options we want to use before we make characters?

I see no reason teleport needs to go away for example, just don't use it in campaigns where it doesn't fit. For instance we played in a ship based campaign that ran in highish levels and we just made an agreement upfront that no one would choose any long range teleportation magic or long term flight options since we wanted ship travel to be an important part of the game. Issue solved no action by Paizo required and it didn't potentially take away options from other players.

[DrDeth]

Ed Reppert wrote:

Conversation:

Player: "This is a really cool spell, I think I'll take it."
GM: "Okay. Where are you going to get it?"
Player: "Um...."

True, the CRB does say the wizard picks his basic spell allotment, which can be interpreted as "it's up to the player what spells he knows". But there are numerical limits to that, and nothing says that the GM can't houserule adding other limitations such as "you must find a mentor willing to teach you the spell - for a price".

" At each new wizard level, he gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that he can cast (based on his new wizard level) for his spellbook. "

It's really not a good way to go, since it can lead to:
Player: "This is a really cool feat, I think I'll take it."
GM: "Okay. Where are you going to get it?"
Player: "Um...."

[DrDeth]

Ed Reppert wrote:

what if you don't want to ban it or make it impossible, but just make it difficult?

Either ban it or say "first, play thru RotRL..."

[Talonhawke]

DrDeth wrote:

Ed Reppert wrote:

what if you don't want to ban it or make it impossible, but just make it difficult?

Either ban it or say "first, play thru RotRL..."

Or go with independent research and enforce all the rules for it.

[DrDeth]

wraithstrike wrote:

Any GM can negate a full round attack by not standing and trading unless you have an archer, and in cases where the PC is the better fighter it often makes sense to not allow the PC's to get in full round attack.

"Step up".

[DrDeth]

Dαedαlus wrote:

I can only imagine how fast dragons would grow, and how powerful they must be. I mean, if I were a 2e dragon, you know I'd be casting every haste I could manage before bedtime. That would be legitimately terrifying, you know? Barely escape your fight with a young adult dragon, and when you return the following week to finish it off, it's already ancient.

Somewhere in the rules or FAQ or something was a point that magical aging only did bad things, never good.

[DrDeth]

Ravingdork wrote:

Yeah,any of these "broken" options can still be a lot of fun in the right group. Shame on those who would take them away and dictate how others should play the game.

If Paizo said "Blood Money no longer exists" nothing would stop you or your players from using it if you so choose.

[DrDeth]

Talonhawke wrote:

DrDeth wrote:

Ed Reppert wrote:

what if you don't want to ban it or make it impossible, but just make it difficult?

Either ban it or say "first, play thru RotRL..."

Or go with independent research and enforce all the rules for it.

" At each new wizard level, he gains two new spells of any spell level or levels that he can cast (based on his new wizard level) for his spellbook. "

[Dαedαlus]

DrDeth wrote:

Dαedαlus wrote:

I can only imagine how fast dragons would grow, and how powerful they must be. I mean, if I were a 2e dragon, you know I'd be casting every haste I could manage before bedtime. That would be legitimately terrifying, you know? Barely escape your fight with a young adult dragon, and when you return the following week to finish it off, it's already ancient.

Somewhere in the rules or FAQ or something was a point that magical aging only did bad things, never good.

First, this is 2e that we're talking about. It took until Pathfinder to come around for sleeping to actually have any value for non-spellcasters. I never played 2e, mind, so I could be wrong, but still.

Second, there are no downsides for a dragon growing old. They just keep getting bigger and bigger (and bigger and bigger) getting more and more powerful. The only disadvantage a dragon has for growing older is a lowered Dexterity, which directly corresponds to higher Strength and Constitution.