[SGG] Biting Wind Spell, as per the Genius Guide to Ice Magic

[Katydid]

Recently, a discussion with my DM has left me puzzled. I was going to post this up in Rules Questions, but then realized that more people who were familiar with the spell would likely frequent this section.

For those of you who have used the Biting Wind spell (available in the Genius Guide to Ice Magic pdf here, or quoted on the PFSRD here), or are familiar with making Read As Written interpretations - Does the wording of the spell...

1. ... Allow multiple summoned animate winds from multiple castings at any given time? Or, does it-
2. ... Mean that subsequent castings eliminate each previously summoned wind, allowing only one active wind at a time?

Thank you so much for your help!

[Purple Duck Games]

I think you could make multiple animate winds.

What part of the spell makes you consider possibility 2?

[Katydid]

Thanks for the reply, Purple Duck Games! My DM raised the point that the text referred to the summon as "the" breeze or "the" wind, and not "a" wind - which was a point that I wanted to research before continuing further discussion.

For example, Summon Monster always refers to its summons as "a/an," implying no particular significance to any one summon. Conversely, the suggestion was that since Biting Wind referred to its summon as "the," this summon was unique and would replace any previously summoned iteration.

I mean, from a mechanical standpoint it seems to make sense. A level 2 sorcerer could summon 6+ winds and direct them to eventually attack the same target at 1d6 per attack against touch, with a will save against shaken on a hit - which seems broken until you factor in action economy. Multiple standard actions to cast and to redirect each wind to attack new targets, compounded with an attack roll per attack, means it's highly unlikely the time-limited winds will be doing something insane like 8d6+ damage/turn to any single target.

From the position of a player, I didn't want to raise the issue without credible sources to support that opinion. So, I've been looking for much more qualified (or maybe even official!) input, like what you've given, over my own word. But I do recognize the possibility that my DM was right as well. :p

[Purple Duck Games]

I don't think wind or a breeze can be defined as quantifiable unit.

This spell is actually more like spiritual weapon than a summoning spell.

[Kolokotroni]

First off, in case you arent aware, most of the genius guides have moved from Super Genius Games to Rogue Genius Games. Owen Stephens the primary author of most of the Genius Guides has created his own company. He is really good about responding to questions, even on older products, so I'd normally recommend asking such questions in the product thread.

Katydid wrote:

Thanks for the reply, Purple Duck Games! My DM raised the point that the text referred to the summon as "the" breeze or "the" wind, and not "a" wind - which was a point that I wanted to research before continuing further discussion.

For example, Summon Monster always refers to its summons as "a/an," implying no particular significance to any one summon. Conversely, the suggestion was that since Biting Wind referred to its summon as "the," this summon was unique and would replace any previously summoned iteration.

I think this is more semantics then rules. I dont think the breeze created is unique.

"This spell creates an animate wind of freezing
cold air that moves and attacks a single target as
directed by the caster."

Quote:

I mean, from a mechanical standpoint it seems to make sense. A level 2 sorcerer could summon 6+ winds and direct them to eventually attack the same target at 1d6 per attack against touch, with a will save against shaken on a hit - which seems broken until you factor in action economy. Multiple standard actions to cast and to redirect each wind to attack new targets, compounded with an attack roll per attack, means it's highly unlikely the time-limited winds will be doing something insane like 8d6+ damage/turn to any single target.

He COULD summon 6 winds, but that would leave him with no resources for other encounters. Keep in mind you would need separate actions to redirect each individual wind. It is also weaker in many ways then a summon spell

Here is a post from owen about the relative power of biting winds:

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

Tom Baumbach wrote:

Is the biting wind spell too good? I've had two separate playtest groups offer concern about that spell specifically. It flew under my radar at first, but those with the concerns made valid points: as far as combat goes, it's at least comparable to (quite possibly better than) summon monster II. Thoughts?

Tom Baumbach wrote:

I wonder if anyone who has used this or the authors would like to comment:

Is the biting wind spell too good?

There are a number of factors that weaken biting wind II compared to any summoned monster.

First, it deals nonlethal damage (incorrectly called subdual damage since this was an early product of ours). That means any foe that has nay healing ability can heal the damage done by biting wind and other damage at the same time (since healing from spells *or abilities* heals both real and nonlethal damage for each point healed). Use the spell gains any group with a healer or a creature with fast healing or regeneration, and the damage evaporates quickly.

Second, it doesn't threaten. One of the common uses for summoned monsters is to grant allied rogues sneak attacks, and this can't do that.

Third, all it does is attack. What I mean is, you can't direct it to grab a fallen ally and pull them to safety, it doesn't take attacks of opportunity, can't be used to block passages or force foes to make Acrobatics checks, and so on. The utility is simply much lower than being able to have a pony haul logs out of the way, a dolphin carry you safely to the surface, a wolf physically block and entrance, and so on. At least in groups I playtest with, summoned monsters are the swiss-army knife of spell, and they get huge utility out of them.

Now all that said, biting winds is a great 1st level spell. In playtest, players took it more than half the time if they had it available. But as a 2nd level spell, it was almost never selected. Maybe dealing 1d6 nonlethal a round, even with a chance of applying penalties, just doesn't stack up to web, blindness/deafness, spectral hand, or scorching ray (especially at higher caster levels).

Exact spell balance is sadly more an art than a science, and play style can impact that a lot. If a group decided this was a 2nd level spell for their group I wouldn't say they were playing "wrong," just that it didn't match the results of my playtesting.

Quote:

From the position of a player, I didn't want to raise the issue without credible sources to support that opinion. So, I've been looking for much more qualified (or maybe even official!) input, like what you've given, over my own word. But I do recognize the possibility that my DM was right as well. :p

I dont think he's correct, but I dont think its a huge issue if he sticks to that. In my mind as a sorceror I wouldnt WANT to cast this multiple times a in a single encounter, as that would be a significant expandature of reasources at low levels, and a relatively poor use of my actions at mid to high levels. I've also posted a link to this thread in the product thread, so hopefully Owen will chime in himself with an 'official' response.

[Owen K. C. Stephens]

Like spiritual weapon, biting wind can be used multiple times to have multiple spell effects going. (And spiritual weapon has "the" rather than "a" in multiple places.)