There isn’t really a (good) reason. Arbitrarily rarity decisions are part and parcel in 2e, best you can do is to simply ignore them.
As with any Uncommon (or Rare) option, the tag is there simply as a "check with your GM" note. The option may not suit a particular campaign, setting, etc.
As mentioned, there is an annoyance factor; on either side, TBH. If the GM allows the PCs access to the spell, then at some point the PC spellcasters should be facing an opponent using the spell...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's because it shuts down half the classes in the game, as well as a great deal of spellcasting NPCs and monsters.
I view the Uncommon tag in this case as being a warning of a potential balance issue or impediment to fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As an aside, must you be flying to cast this spell?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There isn’t really a (good) reason. Arbitrarily rarity decisions are part and parcel in 2e, best you can do is to simply ignore them.
You could simply accept you don't know the reason rather than assert this mysterious (to you) reason must be non-good. The spell can shut down some enemies (& PCs too), which is enough of a reason for GMs to consider its effects before allowing it. As noted by others, it falls along the lines of anti-magic as well as teleportation & mind-reading where it doesn't suit certain campaigns. Hardly arbitrary.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Add an extra roll to most spells, make casting more unreliable, punish using lower-rank spells, works asymmetrically, and requires weird area exclusion stuff. Seems like a good thing to put at uncommon so you run it by your GM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As an aside, must you be flying to cast this spell?
Yeah, I don't like its phrasing either!
"You must form the sphere in an unbroken open space, so its edges don't pass through any creatures or objects, or the spell is lost (though creatures can enter the globe after the spell is cast)."I lean toward allowing it on solid surfaces (or larger vehicles) and into non-moving set pieces. It's such an odd qualification too; a villain could (intentionally or not) have such a messy lair it prevents casting. (?!)
Because they only want you to have access to it through the common "staff of providence" item.
So much for all that talk about restricting access for campaign reasons.
Because they only want you to have access to it through the common "staff of providence" item.
So much for all that talk about restricting access for campaign reasons.
ars grammatica wizards get it too.
Uncommon bypassing mechanics are honestly one of the strangest things about 2e.
To be fair with the staff of provedance you are still limited to one or two casts per day and at lower ranks than what the caster typically would have available to them.
its not going to be able to shut down casters be they players or NPCs unless the GM has introduced it several levels early.
The spell can be Heightened. And the staff provides higher ranked versions; only vs. peons' spells, though admittedly facing lots of peon casters would be a great time to cast it, especially if they cast Force Barrages.)
And as Squiggit notes, there exist Common ways to bypass rarity, often via Clerics through their deity's spells (which some others can get access to too). For specific campaigns, I'd consider how game-changing getting Teleport might be for the party's travel needs and whether I'd like playing a devotee of Barzahk or Pulura.
Because they only want you to have access to it through the common "staff of providence" item.
So much for all that talk about restricting access for campaign reasons.
ars grammatica wizards get it too.
Uncommon bypassing mechanics are honestly one of the strangest things about 2e.
That is because "Uncommon" has three separate meanings:
1) GMs have reason to veto it. For example, Flintlock Musket would be forbidden in pre-firearm settings.2) The mechanic is granted only by a class or feat. For example, Lay on Hands is a focus spell known to all champions.
3) The item or spell is available but much less familiar than a common item or mechanic. For example, Friendfetch was invented locally by an anadi mother Strands-Of-Glowing-Dawn Tzeniwe in Kindled Magic in order to reel in her toddler children.
I would have guessed that Dispelling Globe was uncommon for the GM veto, but given gestalt's revelation about common item Staff of Providence and Squiggit's revelation about the wizard school Ars Grammatica, I would now guess that it is simply not well known. Few enemy spellcasters will know that spell unless they own a Staff of Providence or studied at the School of Ars Grammatica.
Thank you, there are some interesting and useful points here.
Especially about the assymetry: I suppose that antimagic spells should be much more harsh on allied spellcasters, and not that you can do anything you like while just being inside.
Also maybe I asked the question wrongly: the real question is whether you as GMs would allow or not the spell in the campaign and why?
That's what I actually think about. In my campaign there are spellcasters both inside and outside the party.And now another, rules question this time: do you think the spell tries to counteract lingering magic effects on creatures which come inside the globe themselves?
I would allow the spell in my current Strength of Thousands campaign because my rule is that students at the Magaambya Academy have access to all uncommon spells that do not require a particular class or feat. For example, bard Jinx Fuun learned Friendfetch and Umbral Journey. Jinx is a friend of Tzeniwe, so that one was easy to justify. Umbral Journey derailed the bandit chase in Hurricane's Howl, but I was able to salvage the plot without trouble. Common spell Marvelous Mount also derails the bandit chase, so I prepared for the chase to end quickly.
Friendfetch also showed up in my Ironfang Invasion campaign, but Dispelling Globe didn't. The invading opponents in that campaign had very few spellcasters, so Dispelling Globe would have been nearly useless.
As for Dispelling Globe counteracting spells already cast on a creature entering the globe, I cannot rely on the exact wording because, as Ravingdork and Castilliano pointed out, the wording is bad. My gut reaction is that a lingering spell that is entirely inside the globe, either cast before the globe or cast inside of it, would be unaffected. Instead, the counteract is triggered by entering the globe from outside the globe, such as shooting an Acid Arrow from outside the globe, casting a Fireball spell that includes the globe in its area of effect, or an enemy with Heroism already active entering the globe. It would try to counteract all those spells, though just a piece of the Fireball. If a Large enemy partially entered the globe, the counteracting would not trigger, because the Dispelling Globe cannot affect magic outside of it and I do not want the hassle of claiming, "The Heroism in your sword arm is dispelled, but the rest of your Heroism isn't."
I would say that the wording of the third sentence of the spell may provide clarification: "If the counteract attempt succeeds, it prevents only the portion of the spell that would have entered the globe (so if the spell also has targets outside the globe, or part of its area is beyond the globe, those targets or that area are affected normally)." (emphasis mine)
Existing effects are probably not affected, IMO, although the second sentence could be worded better to make that explicit (even by just adding the phrase "It attempts to counteract any spell as it is cast from outside the globe whose area or targets enter into it..." [emphasis mine]).
I mean, it's only a 4th rank spell after all. It's not antimagic field (8th rank)... I would guess it's the PF2e version of globe of invulnerability.
It attempts to counteract any spell from outside the globe whose area or TARGETS enter into it...
This looks clearly written to me. The target of a Heroism spell is an orc. If the orc enters the globe, they risk having Heroism dispelled.
As an aside, must you be flying to cast this spell?
In the very strict reading yes, because the ground is an object which would break the forming of the sphere and they called it a sphere instead of a hemisphere....and didn't add any exception for the ground.
So strictly speaking...yes. You'd have to be flying.