Talk:Greater Bamf (3.5e Spell)

Ratings

Tarkisflux is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.

Since this is a direct growth of bamf, it shouldn't be surprising that I dislike it as well. Twice the distance, twice the time, the same problematic options and scaling... nope. Not for it. The scaling's been toned down a bit, so the spell now starts at 75' per round and only gets up to 130' per round at level 20. Which is better, but combines with the doubled duration and standard action dump to remain a pretty good combat buff / escape effect for a 5th level spell. It's competing with teleport at this level though, and dimension door is a level below... so it's not too bad here. I still doubt I'd let it into a game.

	Aarnott likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	Flavor: Well, as a greater version of another spell, this isn't a big deal. It isn't any better or worse, which is fine. Mechanics: Looks good now

Also, line of effect can be worse than line of sight. Line of effect can't go through windows. The article should be something like:

As Bamf, but with the following changes:

• You can use line of effect instead of line of sight to determine locations to teleport to
• You can teleport 20 ft. per caster level instead of 10 ft. per caster level
• etc.

Hope that helps. --Aarnott (talk) 22:15, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

If greater bamf simply had twice the duration and twice the maximum range-per-teleport that bamf does, it would be a 4th-level spell. However, I feel that the extra options make it 5th-level instead. --Luigifan18 (talk) 18:21, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Warmage acquisition delay

How come? - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:55, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Because greater bamf isn't a direct-attack spell. --Luigifan18 (talk) 19:56, 18 March 2014 (UTC)