Talk:Additional Epic Spell Factors (3.5e Variant Rule)

This seems to be a supplemental rule, so I suggest moving it over there. --Havvy 15:27, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Sure, go for it. -- 20:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Focus
Consider that a Focus is a generally one-time GP investment for being able to cast a spell, and researching an epic spell is definitely a one-time GP and XP investment for being able to cast a spell. Consider also that a clever caster could design every spell to use the same focus. Therefore, you probably shouldn't save money by shunting the cost into the focus, so it should take more than 9000 GP for a -1 spellcraft reduction. --Foxwarrior (talk) 18:41, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... valid point. If we do that, a lot of Spellcraft DCs are going to be recalculated, but we may very well have a more balanced game. --Luigifan18 (talk) 18:55, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * A lot? This only effects homebrew epic spells that have foci... --Foxwarrior (talk) 19:02, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Off the top of my head, that includes Tactical Nuke and Megaton, but I'm sure there are others. I did make a page about the relative practicality of all the epic spells, and the focus price was one of the criteria I considered. So I only have to check there to see what the focus prices are for all the epic spells. --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, yes, there's also Volcano and Electrocute. --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:54, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Ad hoc modifiers from Champions of Ruin
I checked Champions of Ruin a while ago. A handful of spells had ad hoc cost reductions. IIRC, one spell had an annihilation sphere as a material component (ad hoc -50), and another required the caster to lose a limb (ad hoc -25). I don't think there was much details about how it worked, but if someone can check it out before I do, he may add them here.--Idlem (talk) 23:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I've seen them. Some of the ad hocs were the basis of the ones I put here, roughly figuring out their assumed value.  The limb loss is a new one to me though, interesting.  -- Eiji-kun (talk) 01:24, 27 July 2013 (UTC)