Quote from: jibbajibba;564614That is a odd take on it.
I would have thought very few high level spells could be used for setting type stuff.
 
I picked on Wish because its a pointless spell. I can't wish to be as strong as a Storm Giant because the rules specifically limit it for gamist reasons.
Yes its annoying when the Wizard says 'I wish Orcus was dead' or 'I wish i had all 7 of the shards of Magicisac right here in my hands now' and you have to work out a new game but you allowed the power. Nerfing it to say ah you can only kill a being of 10HD or less with a wish, or wish doesn't affect these items because thye are hidden by a cloak of plot immunity, mans that the wish spell is broken.

Wish is funny example because its not 100% necessary to the game - what it does could equally be handled by "a god did it" or some plot involving genies and leprechauns. It does get used alot as an excuse though - there are monsters created directly via wishes (the minotaur?) and/or it gets used as a fudge factor when nothing else in the game can explain an effect. I vaguely remember a number of Dungeon magazine adventures misusing wishes one way or another though I wouldn't be able to cite you any definite sources.
 
I'm not saying there aren't spells out there that aren't unbalanced; just that they have reasons to exist.

Quote from: jibbajibba;564614That is a odd take on it.
I would have thought very few high level spells could be used for setting type stuff.

The power level of settings can rare from low to high. A spell that would be over-powerful/game-breaking in a low-power setting may be just fine in a high-power setting. The Hidden Valley isn't a gritty swords and setting setting, but it is just a bit "above" that. A PC with three wishes would be a like Aladdin, able to change the world in mahjor ways. Arn, on the other hand, is a very high powered setting where a PC with a wish spell a day would simply be a powerful being in the game -- able to challenge but not necessarily beat other powerful beings in the game who probably has access to equally powerful abilities directly or indirectly.

Quote from: Benoist;564551That's horseshit. I completely can, as in, "it is in the realm of possibilities". Sure, there would be consequences to such an act, and it might not be advisable to do so "just because", but the fact remains - no matter what the players do, I can outgun them. So. The notion that the GM loses control of the game because a PC can do something big, or unpredictable, is basically a bunch of bullshit. You're the GM. You're supposed to welcome this stuff and embrace it.

Which brings me back to the spells and their effects. It's okay if the PCs teleport to the lair of the bad guys. It's okay if they can polymorph one target into a chicken, or polymorph themselves into black pudding or an ogre. It's okay if they can find the path or whatever the hell else you might think of. Just play the natural consequences of their actions. Find out the complications which surely will arise from the nature and particular dynamics of the milieu you devised before hand.

It's okay for the PCs to do things that go boom, that go big, that succeed without freaking out at every turn that the game is going to shit and whatnot. It's a game of your imagination. Use it.

Imagination and flexability are my strong suits. That's not a problem.

What I am talking about is keeping the game fun, and challenging.

High level casters, and good magic items make any task trivial.

When the characters reach this point, the gm has a few options.
1) Overpower the characters with brute force. Obviously lame and unfun.
2) Let them effortlessly achieve everything. Obviously lame and unfun.
3) Use cheap tactics like anti magic zones, npc's immune to everything. etc...
    Very, very unfun for players.

Searching for a missing child?
Cast limited wish to teleport the child to safety. Or Scry, and use teleport to pop in and out.

Need beholder eyestalks for a magic ritual? Cast polymorph on a cat and harvest away! No need to actually risk searching for, outwitting, and defeating a competant beholder!

Farmers suffering from drought? Summon air elementals to push rainclouds over the farms. Cast alter weather, etc...

All of the worlds Elves are transported by an evil artifact to a floating block in Archeron. That might be a challenge! Wait, quick, use a divination to locate them, cast plane travel...

I am not saying it's impossible to challenge a magic heavy party, but its not creativity that does that. What actually challenges them is denial of their magic.

The only thing they can't do, is function without magic.

Quote from: S'mon;564608Polymorph Other (taking 1e version) is fine as a 1-shot kill that allows a save IMO; if you have actually taken the months of play needed to get an M-U 1 up to M-U 7 then you deserve that kind of power.

But it is broken as a spell that lets you turn all your level 0 mook followers into dragons, as per the example in the PHB.  Polymorp Other to frog or pig is fine but I'm not allowing Polymorph Other to Red Dragon, Gold Dragon etc.

I hope all those mook followers have super-high CON scores to make those system shock rolls. I don't know how many followers would volunteer to be the subject of a spell that might outright kill them.

Quote from: talysman;564536Nope, I'm thinking of OD&D Polymorph Others.

My beef is with the later versions of the spell, which, even though they do might not grant special abilities, turn the target into a new form, permanently until dispelled; and unlike polymorph self, said target does not retain his mental faculties. A wizard polymorphed into a frog won't be casting any spells because, you know, he's a fucking frog. A red dragon polymorphed into a snail won't breathe fire, etc.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;564639I hope all those mook followers have super-high CON scores to make those system shock rolls. I don't know how many followers would volunteer to be the subject of a spell that might outright kill them.

Probably the ones that you don't tell it might kill them?

Dave, we need to charge into this room and grab the septre. If we don't get it then we will all be dead in 5 minutes. Now these creatures are tough so we had an idea one of us needs to take the form of a dragon to deal with the Bugbears. Now I can't do it because need to activate the sceptre. Are you willing? Its worth an extra loot share.

Is it dangerous?

No not at all. I zap you you change we're golden.

Okay fine, cool I get to be a dragon......

Not quoting Ben and Bill because I'm on the fucking iPhone. I'll edit the quotes in later at home.

Ben - you're preaching to the choir here. I'm happy that the spell RAW is working for you. It's just that a world in which a 7th-level magic-user has this sort of power, is not a world I'm interested in emulating. Nothing to do with "plot" or "story" or the usual RPGsite swear words, and everything to do with Vreeg's First Law, i.e. changing the system to better reflect the world you're emulating.

Bill - I'm not 100% on board with some of the examples -- I think finding a missing kid should be an adventure for lower levels, unless it's a really important kid (eg. the Crown Princess) in which case locating her is just a hook for a meatier and more challenging scenario; but I agree with the general principle.

Marleycat - the lack of spell failure mechanics is one of my few real peeves with D&D. DCC has a great system for this, but it's a bit more involved than I'd like it to be. I still want to try it out, though. I like my magic fickle and dangerous.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;564639I hope all those mook followers have super-high CON scores to make those system shock rolls. I don't know how many followers would volunteer to be the subject of a spell that might outright kill them.

How about a charmed follower who is told it is a helpful enchantment?

Quote from: S'mon;564608Polymorph Other (taking 1e version) is fine as a 1-shot kill that allows a save IMO; if you have actually taken the months of play needed to get an M-U 1 up to M-U 7 then you deserve that kind of power.

But it is broken as a spell that lets you turn all your level 0 mook followers into dragons, as per the example in the PHB.  Polymorp Other to frog or pig is fine but I'm not allowing Polymorph Other to Red Dragon, Gold Dragon etc.

Quote from: Bill;564646How about a charmed follower who is told it is a helpful enchantment?

A charmed follower might be very receptive to the idea. There are many reasons why relying on charmed followers isn't the best idea though.

Great question, beejazz.

First off, I'm with Bill.  I enjoy a challenging game.  As a player, it's fun to 'completely overwhelm' your opposition at times - especially if you were smart and made a great plan (I love it when a plan comes together).  But that isn't fun if it happens all the time.  I think that's where the term 'I win' button comes from - if you have a single action that always defeats your opponents, using it in every situation becomes a real problem.  If you're simulationist at all, and your characters HAVE to defeat their opponents, it makes sense that they'd do whatever it takes to defeat them.  

Forcecage is a good example of a spell that fundamentally changes the game, in my mind.  If your players have access to Forcecage, any opponent either needs to have a counter for it, or will be defeated by it.  There really is no middle ground.  If every opponent has a counter, that's not fun or fair.  If no opponent has a counter, that's not fun, either.  A spell like that is a problem because it then becomes a consideration for EVERYTHING that comes after.  The DM then needs to decide whether it's reasonable for every encounter to have that counter...  

For example, if the players are fighting an evil wizard who knows their tactics, it's probably reasonable for him to be prepared.  He'll either have dimension door or disintegrate.  But what about an evil fighter who knows their tactics?  He should probably be prepared, too.  Does he have to hire a wizard minion with an appropriate spell?  Or buy a magic item that negates it?  

What if the bad guy DOESN'T know the party's tactics, but does know that these types of spells exist?  Does every high level character prepare a defesnse against Forcecage?  

If I say a particular spell 'breaks' a game, I tend to mean that every design choice for the DM has to specifically consider that spell.  There are quite a few spells that tend to do that.  

Teleport can definitely be a problem - depending on the reliability.  But I've seen too many published adventures that just say 'this dungeon is magical, so teleport doesn't work here to believe that it doesn't cause a problem for a lot of games - basically, it allows players to bypass challenges.  If used too effectively, the game is boring.  If it's blocked in arbitrary fashion, that's not fun either.  It's better to have a similar spell that works in a different way.  For example, instead of 'teleport', maybe you can have 'flame walk' - it let's you move from one fire to another, so you couldn't use it to appear in the evil wizard's lair (unless he had a fire, and even then, maybe it would be warded).  Even the Harry Potter 'floo powder' that lets you appear in a fireplace has some major 'challenge' advantages over 'apparition' - and sure enough, they had to block 'apparition' in several places and/or introduce dangers to using the spell to avoid either the bad guys instantly winning or the good guys instantly defeating the bad guys - spells like teleport let you 'force a confrontation' without doing some of the fun parts of the adventure (like getting to the final boss).  

Spells that change the way the players experience the world aren't NECESSARILY a problem - but they easily can become one.  It's important that the players are all in agreement with each other and the DM about 'appropriate' uses of these spells.  

Some other spells that make the short list:

antimagic sphere
freedom of movement
plane shift
dominate monster

Quote from: S'mon;564608Polymorph Other (taking 1e version) is fine as a 1-shot kill that allows a save IMO; if you have actually taken the months of play needed to get an M-U 1 up to M-U 7 then you deserve that kind of power.

But it is broken as a spell that lets you turn all your level 0 mook followers into dragons, as per the example in the PHB.  Polymorp Other to frog or pig is fine but I'm not allowing Polymorph Other to Red Dragon, Gold Dragon etc.

Wait. What? With Polymorph Other there's a chance per day that the mind of the polymorphed creature turns into that of its new form; that chance gets very good when there's a commoner -> dragon disparity in power levels; and, of course, you're betting the follower doesn't decide of his own free will "fuck servitude, I'm a dragon now" "fuck you, you turned me into a monster, I have a wife and kids" etc. etc.

This is why you can't polymorph your own party members.

I don't see the abuse. You can generally fuck shit up, of course, but I don't see the abuse.

Quote from: The Butcher;564645Ben - you're preaching to the choir here. I'm happy that the spell RAW is working for you. It's just that a world in which a 7th-level magic-user has this sort of power, is not a world I'm interested in emulating. Nothing to do with "plot" or "story" or the usual RPGsite swear words, and everything to do with Vreeg's First Law, i.e. changing the system to better reflect the world you're emulating.

I think that Butcher makes a key point here, which is that far too often discussions about magic-users devolve into discussions about game mechanics and abstract notions of balance. This kind of thing breaks any sense of immersion. The question should be "how do we emulate the powers a magic-user has", not "which magic-user spells are broken".

The abilities of a fighter or thief are something that we can understand, and will make sense in more or less any setting. Magic-users can't work like that – we have no real-life examples to base them on – and this means that one of the first thing a DM needs to decide is: 'How does magic work in the fantasy world where my game is taking place?'. Having done that, the DM can decide if they need to modify the D&D rules (or create new rules) to emulate the way magic works in their own gaming world.

I think this is quite a deep thing really – too often the D&D rules are taken as an end in themselves, that define the game world used for a campaign. I much prefer it when a GM imagines an amazing fantasy world, and then uses the rules from D&D as a starting point to allow other people to explore it.

Quote from: Glazer;564708I think that Butcher makes a key point here, which is that far too often discussions about magic-users devolve into discussions about game mechanics and abstract notions of balance. This kind of thing breaks any sense of immersion. The question should be "how do we emulate the powers a magic-user has", not "which magic-user spells are broken".

The abilities of a fighter or thief are something that we can understand, and will make sense in more or less any setting. Magic-users can't work like that – we have no real-life examples to base them on – and this means that one of the first thing a DM needs to decide is: 'How does magic work in the fantasy world where my game is taking place?'. Having done that, the DM can decide if they need to modify the D&D rules (or create new rules) to emulate the way magic works in their own gaming world.

I think this is quite a deep thing really – too often the D&D rules are taken as an end in themselves, that define the game world used for a campaign. I much prefer it when a GM imagines an amazing fantasy world, and then uses the rules from D&D as a starting point to allow other people to explore it.

I like how you think. Sadly, many feel the rules are sacrosanct.

Quote from: Glazer;564708I think that Butcher makes a key point here, which is that far too often discussions about magic-users devolve into discussions about game mechanics and abstract notions of balance. This kind of thing breaks any sense of immersion. The question should be "how do we emulate the powers a magic-user has", not "which magic-user spells are broken".

The abilities of a fighter or thief are something that we can understand, and will make sense in more or less any setting. Magic-users can't work like that – we have no real-life examples to base them on – and this means that one of the first thing a DM needs to decide is: 'How does magic work in the fantasy world where my game is taking place?'. Having done that, the DM can decide if they need to modify the D&D rules (or create new rules) to emulate the way magic works in their own gaming world.

I think this is quite a deep thing really – too often the D&D rules are taken as an end in themselves, that define the game world used for a campaign. I much prefer it when a GM imagines an amazing fantasy world, and then uses the rules from D&D as a starting point to allow other people to explore it.

That is all true and I think one of the D&D problems is that it doesn't clearly define how magic works in the game world, whilst at the same time having set rules about how magic works in the game world that assume a certain method of how magic works. This opens the door for arguements.
If they openly exposed how magic works a lot of issues slots versus spell points, high level spell recovery etc would all go.

I find it much easier to play to the spirit of a thing if I know the 'science' behind it. When we play Star trek we know that Trilithium is a powerful source of energy that the warp core uses to generate a warp bubble around hte ship which enables it to travel FTL. Because we know that we can play with the concepts and the science. Similarly in Skyrim we know that certain natural and unnatural substances may have magical powers and we can mix them in an alchemical reaction to get combined effects.
Most fantasy novels that use magic as a tool of the protagonists explain it (Tolkien is the main exception) and those that don't explain magic generally use it as a plot device that the protagonist can not access (say Newhonian for example). We know that Begarath the Sorcerer concentrated his will into a word that can influence the real world and that that power is tied to certain individuals we also knwo there are rules to its use.
D&D doesn't do that and its hard for the DM to do it and not have to revisit every spell because they aren't built consistently.

Quote from: The Butcher;564645Ben - you're preaching to the choir here. I'm happy that the spell RAW is working for you. It's just that a world in which a 7th-level magic-user has this sort of power, is not a world I'm interested in emulating. Nothing to do with "plot" or "story" or the usual RPGsite swear words, and everything to do with Vreeg's First Law, i.e. changing the system to better reflect the world you're emulating.

OK I completely agree with the others and that ties into what Bill was saying about searching for a child and spells solving these kinds of issues casually. That's actually the key point. And I agree.

You guys actually don't want to play high level D&D.

It's not that it's unplayable or unmanageable or broken or whatnot. It's just that you don't want to play a different game than Low-Level D&D. And yes, the campaign does, or is supposed to, change scope in steps as the PCs progress in levels, to the point that they are dealing with completely different types of challenges at mid-high level than they would at low level. If you are still trying to run a high level party through the lost-child-in-the-woods hook, then you're failing at basic prep for the DM of high level parties, because these issues are indeed trivial for PCs at this level range.

So. It's not so much a question of spells being "broken" or the game "breaking down"... that is total fucking bullshit. What is unquestionable, however, is when you guys say "I want to play low level D&D, and the game changes at high level and I don't like what it is"... then... fine. You want to play Red Box on and on, basically. That's cool. Doesn't make the game unplayable for those who actually LIKE to play high level games and don't feel like they're overwhelmed by wishes and teleports, thank you very much.