Talk:Spell Ward (3.5e Skill Trick)

Comments

The forewarned edit comment makes me think that this was supposed to require a check of some kind to activate. Was that left out on purpose?

Per SRD:Spell Resistance and Spell Immunity, SR does not stack with other sources. The part where you add half your ranks to existing SR goes against that, and I don't know if it's intentional or not. It could also open up situations where you get much worse (because your normal SR is less than half your ranks) or much better SR than this skill trick would give you. If you want stacking, it might be better to say that this SR stacks with any existing SR you have, but can not raise your total SR over your spellcraft ranks +3 (or whatever limit you think appropriate and/or fair).

And I think this is probably a H level trick, not a M one. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 20:48, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Nope, no check at all. This is a static boost. --Luigifan18 (talk) 20:52, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Setting max to double spellcraft opens up situations where they are basically magic immune. A SRD:Drow with this trick can have an SR equal to 11 + level (racial) + level (spellcraft ranks) + 3 (more spell craft ranks) = 14 + 2 x level, but is capped at 2 x level + 9. By level 11 that's 31 SR, and a level 11 caster can't hurt them with spells that allow SR except on a 20 without investment in spell penetration. A level 30 character (relevant since you like Epic) is up to 69, and basically off the rails entirely. Is this an acceptable mechanical effect? - Tarkisflux ^Talk 21:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

No, I'll tone it down. I want the bonus to be meaningful, but as you pointed out, ×2 is too much. Is 1.5× reasonable? I'm just worried that anything less than the actual Spellcraft value won't allow sufficient room for a creature's existing spell resistance, and anything less won't allow for the Spellcraft boost. --Luigifan18 (talk) 22:03, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

1.5 times would just delay the onset of near magic immunity, not eliminate it. If you want something meaningful over all levels and to never have that problem, you might want to use a static boost instead, maybe 8 + ranks. Then at level 1 you have 12 SR, at level 10 you have 21 SR, and so on. At every level you have an even chance of ignoring a spell from a caster of your level who hasn't been investing in breaking through SR. For the stacking, maybe just increase the cap to 11 + ranks or 13 + ranks. Or tune from those numbers, based on what you think an appropriate failure chance for an equal level caster with or without SR penetration investment throwing spells at you should be. As long as it's a X + ranks setup, it won't balloon into crazy town. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 22:09, 31 October 2012 (UTC)

Changed to an addition-based setup, so it doesn't go up exponentially (well, more like high linear, but... yeah, it was still overly high when levels got super-high... I know Epic's the realm of crazy-high numbers, but still...) Even with super-high SR, though, that doesn't block a lightning bolt to the ceiling that causes a cave-in. --Luigifan18 (talk) 00:18, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Activation

What is it? Come to think, whats the duration of the boost? -- Eiji-kun (talk) 13:07, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Am I missing something?

You state: "If you already have spell resistance, your existing spell resistance is increased by your ranks in Spellcraft, but this skill trick cannot make your spell resistance greater than your ranks in Spellcraft + 6." Using the Drow example above, who has SR equal to 11+HD, that's SR 16 at class level 5, which is the earliest she could take this skill trick if she puts max ranks in Spellcraft. Since her "ranks in Spellcraft +6" would 14 (8+6), that means her SR actually goes DOWN by using this skill trick. Unless I'm missing something here. Spanambula (talk) 14:01, 17 October 2014 (UTC)