The Gaming Den

Hicks wrote:So if you know about an abusive 2e wizard spell, magical item, monster, or combination thereof, please share.

shadzar wrote:

Hicks wrote:So if you know about an abusive 2e wizard spell, magical item, monster, or combination thereof, please share.

yeah it is 2e not 3.x so you have spell research and can make any damn kind of spell you want for it. MAGIC CAN DO ANYTHING.. what more do you need than that to be "abusive"?

Prak_Anima wrote:

shadzar wrote:

Hicks wrote:So if you know about an abusive 2e wizard spell, magical item, monster, or combination thereof, please share.

yeah it is 2e not 3.x so you have spell research and can make any damn kind of spell you want for it. MAGIC CAN DO ANYTHING.. what more do you need than that to be "abusive"?

...have you ever actually looked at 3.X?

shadzar wrote: one wizard need just work on a spell his whole life, send that powerful spell back in time to his younger self, which will likely kill the elder version in the process, and this continues until the younger wizard alters the spell into a new one to send back, and so on and so forth. the final spell being more powerful than all the gods in all the crystal spheres and all the beings of every plane. and this spell over so many iterations has been made level 1 so the younger wizard can cast it instantly.

it is basically an infinite combo in MTG like Mesa-craft. so all you really need to do is develop the final spell, since the intervening spells really wont matter as they are for the end result and each new timeline destroys the previous spells leaving only the newest and final version.

so you create the final version super spell you want, and a spell of the proper level that lets you send a scroll or spellbook back in time without error to a specific person.

punpun takes like a thousands little gimmicks and in 2e a human wizard can do much more with 2 spells. sadly it can probably be done in 3rd as well if you can get those freaky ECL/WBL/etc shit to fit the 2 spells into, but nobody even thinks about things like that, instead they try to scour silly splatbooks published by someone else to do their thinking for them to try to break the game.

so could YOU do it with 2 spells in 3.x like i just did it for 2e?

rasmuswagner wrote:As usual, Shadzar advocates ignoring all the rulebooks and proceeding directly to sucking the MCs cock.

2e DMG wrote:Spell research is not something the DM does without player input--or vice versa.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

Prak_Anima wrote:Well, I'll admit I haven't read 2e

2e DMG wrote:Spell Research

One of the most overlooked assets of the wizard or priest is the ability to research new spells. In the hands of a clever player, this ability results in powerful and unique player characters. Since the player has to get involved to make the research rules work, it is also an excellent method for getting player ideas into the campaign. However, since there are so many different possibilities in spell research, there are few set rules. Use the following as guidelines when faced with magical research in the campaign.

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

3.5 DMG, Creating New Spells wrote:When creating a new spell, use the existing spells as benchmarks, and use common sense. Creating a spell is actually fairly easy—it’s assigning a level to the new spell that’s hard. If the “best” 2nd-level spell is invisibility, and the “best” 1st-level spell is charm person or sleep, and the new spell seems to fall between those spells in power, it’s probably a 2nd-level spell. (Sleep, however, is a strange example, because it’s a spell that gets less useful as the caster gains levels—compared to a spell such as magic missile or fireball, which gets better, up to a point, for higher-level casters. Make sure spells that only affect low-level creatures are low-level spells.)
Here are some pieces of advice to consider.
• If a spell is so good that you can’t imagine a caster not wanting it all the time, it’s either too powerful or too low in level.
• An experience point (XP) cost is a good balancing force. An expensive material component is only a moderately good balancing force. (Money can be easy to come by; an XP loss almost always hurts.)
• When determining level, compare range, duration, and target (or area) to other spells to balance. A long duration or a large area can make up for a lesser effect, depending on the spell.
• A spell with a very limited use (only works against red dragons) could conceivably be one level lower than it would be if it had a more general application. Even at a low level, this is the sort of spell a sorcerer or bard never takes, and other casters would prepare it only if they knew in advance it would be worthwhile.
• Wizards and sorcerers should not cast healing spells, but they should have the best offensive spells. If the spell is flashy or dramatic, it should probably be a wizard/sorcerer spell.
• Clerics are best at spells that deal with alignment and have the best selection of curative and repair spells. They also have the best selection of information-gathering spells, such as commune and divination.
• Druids are best at spells that deal with plants and animals.
• Rangers and paladins should not have flashy attack spells in the manner of magic missile and fireball.
• Bard spells include enchantments, information-gathering spells, and a mixture of other kinds of spells, but do not include powerful offensive spells such as cone of cold.

2e DMG wrote:Clerics casting fireball spells or mages healing injured characters is contrary to the styles of the two classes

Copyright 1999 TSR Inc.

[*]Wizards and sorcerers should not cast healing spells,

shadzar wrote:you have spell research and can make any damn kind of spell you want for it. MAGIC CAN DO ANYTHING.. what more do you need than that to be "abusive"?