How to make direct damage worth a spell slot

[Bigode]

I think you're going about it the wrong way. The problem isn't that direct damage spells are shitty, its that 3rd edition allowed hit points to balloon out to absurd levels. (and then did weird, half-assed and generally stupid things that tried and failed to make damage relevant after about third level).

Go back to the first and second edition scale of hit points, and the system is largely functional again.

Heh, that'd change ... a lot of stuff. What'd you say about having always HD = CR = ECL, and limiting ability scores (such as, say, Con) to 20 + level/2 (about what I'm doing now)? Yeah, some classes get their exceptions, but that's the point of RPS.

[JonSetanta]

And if you want to get cheesy, it can be argued that +0 metamagics count as -1 with Arcane Thesis, meaning you can just stick a bunch of Energy Substitution and other minor crap on to make it +0 levels.

Doesn't work like that.

In the end you're better off making a new spell if the appropriate spell level rather than Arcane Thesis/Incantapiss tricks.

[RandomCasualty2]

Doesn't work like that.

In the end you're better off making a new spell if the appropriate spell level rather than Arcane Thesis/Incantapiss tricks.

Not really.

Making a new spell depends entirely on your DM.

[JonSetanta]

Making a new spell depends entirely on your DM.

Oh snap is it fallacy time?

[Surgo]

Except, uh, it's not a fallacy at all because there are no actual hard and fast rules for developing a new spell.

[SunTzuWarmaster]

Correct, the Dm can make them up!

Come on people, let's face it, the Fire Mage is fun because setting things on fire is fun, rolling lots of dice is fun, and doing it all the time is even more fun. Also, the Fire Mage can go to crazy town if you want it to, with proper feat selection. Further, thematically oriented characters are cool, and nothing says thematic like setting everything on fire all the time.

No comments on the feat chain. Whatever.

[JonSetanta]

No comments on the feat chain. Whatever.

That was my comment. Spells > feat chains, although your concept is effective also. Just a bit... too specific.

[Kaelik]

And if you want to get cheesy, it can be argued that +0 metamagics count as -1 with Arcane Thesis, meaning you can just stick a bunch of Energy Substitution and other minor crap on to make it +0 levels.

Doesn't work like that.

In the end you're better off making a new spell if the appropriate spell level rather than Arcane Thesis/Incantapiss tricks.

So you can fire off two ranged touch attacks that each do 180+15d6 damage and one negative level and force a save against daze as a swift action from a fourth level slot?

So that's 2 fourth level slots in one round for 720 + 210 (average) damage, 3/4ths of which is untyped, 4 negative levels, and 4 saves against daze just in case you somehow survive.

Yeah, I'm sure you can design a better spell then that instead of using "Incantapiss."

Just to be clear, you do call it that because it is in every way superior to every other PrC option right?

[Caedrus]

Go back to the first and second edition scale of hit points, and the system is largely functional again.

What was the first and second edition scale of hit points, incidentally?

Making a new spell depends entirely on your DM.

Oh snap is it fallacy time?

You're joking right? You think that "houseruling depends on the DM" is some form of fallacious thinking? As others have said, there are no real rules for making new spells.

[Koumei]

What was the first and second edition scale of hit points, incidentally?

IIRC, it was:

*Roll for them at every level. None of this "max at first level" stuff.
*Con barely helped at all (as was typical for stats back then)
*At a certain level, you start getting a (small) fixed number or just stop gaining HP at all
*Damage dice keep happily scaling past the point that HP stop - so the opposite to what happens now

[Voss]

For characters it was d<whatever> + con bonus (which didn't kick in unless you had a 15, and was +2 at higher stats unless you were a fighter type) until 9-10th level. Then it was +2 or +3 per level, no con bonus after that.

for monsters it was simply lower. Ancient dragons had 80-100 hit points, not 300-500.

Damage for spells scaled a bit (fireball was uncapped in first, capped in second). Melee damage didn't scale much at all- the weapon +, maybe specialization, and maybe your DM gave you a belt of giant strength. That was it.

@Sphere- the handful of multipliers (which are the real problem) can be axed. On the other hand... if you don't axe it, then everybody gets to play a rough equivalent of a save or die game. Whether thats to your taste... well. Thats another issue. But its essentially what I mean- all the modifiers to damage are essentially an attempt to compensate for hit points that went to crazy town. Half the bullshit wouldn't exist if they hadn't done that in the first place.

[JonSetanta]

Yeah, I'm sure you can design a better spell then that instead of using "Incantapiss."

Just to be clear, you do call it that because it is in every way superior to every other PrC option right?

Right. If a PrC is clearly superior to every other PrC ever made something went wrong; either all the rest outright suck or you have yourself one monster of a munchkin.
Either way, that's not right.

Caedrus: AD&D hit points were both low on average and did indeed cap off after about mid-level range (although the exact time varies by class)

[Koumei]

"Kaleidoscopic Doom"

I don't even know what it is or where it's from, but it's just an awesome name. Thought I'd mention that.

As mentioned before, Initiate of the Sevenfold Veil, CompArc.

KDoom is a targeted Dispel, and every spell that is stripped away also bestows the effects of walking through a colour of a Prismatic Wall. If you Dispel seven of their spells, they're fucked. Proper fucked. Before ze Germans get zere.

[Caedrus]

What was the first and second edition scale of hit points, incidentally?

IIRC, it was:

*Roll for them at every level. None of this "max at first level" stuff.
*Con barely helped at all (as was typical for stats back then)
*At a certain level, you start getting a (small) fixed number or just stop gaining HP at all
*Damage dice keep happily scaling past the point that HP stop - so the opposite to what happens now

Caedrus: AD&D hit points were both low on average and did indeed cap off after about mid-level range (although the exact time varies by class)

Thanks much for the explanation.

[Tequila Sunrise]

Direct damage instantanious spells (such as magic missile, scorching ray, fireball, cone of cold, disintegrate, and meteor swarm) should be a swift action to cast, and you should be able to cast it a number of times equal to your caster level with the use of one spell slot.

Thoughts?

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that such a house rule is absurdly broken. The swift action idea isn't bad; it makes direct damage a nice "I might as well if I have the spell slot" option, but the castings per caster level makes it obscene.

There are many ways to fix direct damage, a few of which have been mentioned, so I'll just contribute this: the best, really the only way, to truly fix spells and casters in general is to start the Spells chapter from scratch as I began to do here: http://lucasbuchanan.com/TS Spell Book 3e.pdf. Granted, doing so is a huge project that's beyond most gamers' quota of free time and patience but there you go.

TS