561
edits
Changes
::Well one of my biggest complaints was me reading the spell incorrectly. I thought the spell specified no people friendly to the caster, not the target. Whoops. But, to me, that makes it even more niche. Fighting a single opponent, IME, isn't the most common occurrence. Sure, once you wipe the floor with a boss's minions, or take out everyone else in a bandit raid you've got a powerful spell in your pocket. I'm not sure if this makes it better or worse. On the one hand, you can use the spell a lot more than I had previously thought which was one of my complaints (that it was useless when with people) but on the other hand you can use the spell a lot more than I had previously thought and it's a pretty powerful spell for something that stacks with just about anything. I'll consider changing to a dislike but currently my thoughts still stand on oppose, sorry. Edit: Yeah I didn't read the date on those. Four years since then and your comment here seems much more adult than 2013 you was so consider my opinion unsoured but I'm still unsure on balance- [[User:Aeturo|Aeturo]] ([[User talk:Aeturo|talk]]) 15:32, 21 May 2017 (MDT)
:::A lot of home-brew has a few challenges between the writer's method of writing and the interpretation when read, it's one of the things which cause the "omg this XXX" response in the comments. The best thing i can say is question it's rulings/ingame workings before finishing an opinion of it being good/bad, because usually those VERY little rulings can blow a simple spell completely out of proportion. Example:[[SRD:Prestidigitation]] to change the flavor of the enemies saliva to feces causing -10 distraction penalty(DM discretion)... or to change basic water to taste like wine during a surprise camp-out with a noble. They're nice for "flavor"(get it?) but even their effect isn't always accurate or guaranteed because it turns out the enemy enjoys the 'unusual' taste, over his toothache...
:::"Powerful depending on the situation." Can describe many/most spells, it's the challenge of a player to make them useful in any situation or make the situation one which the spell is powerful. fighting single opponents "should" happen between 35-60% of the time (biggest variances being the DM, the way's the DM is looking up/creating his encounters and the Campaign itself.), putting it on the lower end of the encounter ratio. the biggest things that balances this spell out, is the very expected fact that it like all other spells is that it has to be chosen against other spells and has a very small duration.
:::Consider this, which are you going to want in a mid-town thug-fight(which fighting is illegal), fireball or scorching ray? both spells are similar, but scorching ray has a much smaller light-show. The ending answer should be that you have to choose the right X for every situation, if you have the wrong X, hope your wrong X isn't 100% can be "worked" into another situation...
:::The balance of any X, is the absolute hardest thing for creators/players to agree on because we all play in different scales. Many DM's don't let their player's get past level 17 without killing them (multiple times +party) before resetting if they somehow manage to hit 20. Others make it their challenge to kill the characters before level 13, not wanting to do research/work on harder monsters. I've managed to DM'd ONE group of 5-7 for nine years? to levels 50-70(one even manage to become a character-deity) and I(the DM) had to research almost everything my players were pulling out from the many different books, Most i liked and gave the thumbs-up, some i didn't and had to convince my players of why i couldn't allow it. [[User:Snafusam|Snafusam]] ([[User talk:Snafusam|talk]]) 21:39, 21 May 2017 (MDT)
An example of something that needs to be denied "obviously" despite it's 100% legality/hilarity from the book google: Breaking D&D 3.5: The Muscle Wizard or, How to Rage Your Way to Infinite Spells
== Comments and Comparisons ==
