Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Have Pathfinder or Ponyfinder rules questions, ask here!
User avatar
David
Site Admin
Posts: 2218
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby David » Mon May 26, 2014 8:48 am

According to Paizo(http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/mons ... ation.html), the average good save of a CR 7 is +10, and fortitude is the good save for monsters more often than not.

I would only hit a person with 'crossing the wall' once in a given round, even if zig zagged, but that's up to your GM. The flexibility of the wall is for filling gaps, or possibly trying to pen someone in, or out, not multiply the damage of the spell.

Stun is not paralyzed. You can't be coup de graced and are not helpless, and, in this case, it only lasts one round. Comparing it to 'dazzled', the weakest condition ever conceived(-1 to hit, that's it) is a little perplexing.

Thanks for bringing it up though! We'd love to hear how spells go in actual play.

Tamara Bloodhoof
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:19 am

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby Tamara Bloodhoof » Mon May 26, 2014 11:22 am

...Thanks to my computer being unable to get onto this page, I am forced to type this on a tablet, but once I am on a computer again, I will show you, in at least 3 different scenarios just how broken this spell is. This comment is now directed to David. You are making me feel sad right now. You have constantly said that things I come up with are too powerful, but then proceed to break multiple rules for creating spells. I know that I make mistakes as well, but I also try to fix them if they are truly broken. Iimplore you to re-read the ultimate magic's guide to creating spells, and then ask you to look at this spell with a critical eye. I also ask to please hear your opinion on all of these spells, and, again, ask yo to look at them all critically.

As for my final question; can you tell me, in all honesty, that you would not only choose Wall of Fire instead of this spell, but other 4th level spells as well?

Solitary Performance
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2013 8:44 am
Location: Blevik
Contact:

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby Solitary Performance » Mon May 26, 2014 4:58 pm

I've never been one for grabbing Wall spells in general. In general, though, I find more practical use of Ice Storm (3d6 blunt + 2d6 cold damage), Dragon's Breath (1d6/caster level damage matching a dragon's breath weapon)(APG), Summon Monster IV, Lesser Globe of Invulnerability, Phantasmal Killer, and something like Heighened, Selective (APG), or Lingering (APG) metamagics on a 3rd level spell (like fireball or lightning bolt).
But, as I opened with, I'm biased... I've cast more Wall spells in Diablo games than in D&D-based ones, even counting the old classic 1st Edition PC games, with their little wheel copy protection measures.

User avatar
David
Site Admin
Posts: 2218
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby David » Mon May 26, 2014 5:04 pm

I feel compelled to point out that 'actual play' involves players and a GM. 'Theorycrafting' we have already done. More of the same only goes so far. In theory, everything works the same as theories go. In practice, few things do.

Edit: Another difference from wall of fire, which is what it is being compared against. Wall of fire blocks all line of sight, while the electric wall does not provide any cover or concealment of any kind.

Tamara Bloodhoof
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:19 am

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby Tamara Bloodhoof » Mon May 26, 2014 5:48 pm

...And you have completely ignored what I said. Is there even a point pointing out problems or sections that need improvement?

User avatar
David
Site Admin
Posts: 2218
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby David » Mon May 26, 2014 5:54 pm

Your last post(before this one) had no new facts. You have also failed to address any feedback regarding any other spell. This conversation is feeling extremely toxic.

Tamara Bloodhoof
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:19 am

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby Tamara Bloodhoof » Mon May 26, 2014 6:02 pm

Rainbow flight allows you to gain the benefit of up to two feats with a first level spell. The spell needs a shorter duration or needs to be reduced in duration. Sticky hooves is, again, a spell that helps overcome racial shortcomings, letting ponies hold up to four items and, for a wizard, it allows them to wield up to four wands that can be activated at once. Again, the spell is good, but the duration is far too long. If it were tens of minutes it wouldn't be bad, if it were minutes, it would be decent.

Also, David, haste and Rainbow Wings are completely different, and when one lasted 100x as long while being two spell lbs lower, it becomes practically incomparable. Try using Expeditious Retreat next time, it does the same thing but for land speed, yet it only lasts minutes per level.

Edit: Also, just as an FYI, my last post asked you to re-read the spell creation rules and re-evaluate all the spells. That is a point that you obviously either missed or ignored.

User avatar
David
Site Admin
Posts: 2218
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby David » Mon May 26, 2014 6:23 pm

I do not own the book you refer to.

Tamara Bloodhoof
Posts: 155
Joined: Sat Aug 24, 2013 7:19 am

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby Tamara Bloodhoof » Mon May 26, 2014 6:28 pm

It is one of the core set, and if you type in http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ulti ... pells.html you will find a page that should explain all of the problems I have with these spells.

User avatar
David
Site Admin
Posts: 2218
Joined: Fri Aug 23, 2013 3:52 pm

Re: Spells, or the brokeness there-of

Postby David » Mon May 26, 2014 7:27 pm



Return to “Rule Questions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest