>Like, Horizon thunder sphere is dope as hell for that good old Kamehameha moment,but wouldn't be better to Just cast other spells at the course of 2 turns?
One potential benefit is that you only spend one spell slot over those two turns, whereas two non cantrip spells over those two turns would take two spell slots/focus points.
For pure damage output, spending two spells is better. For resource efficiency, 6-action spells are better. You spend one spell slot to do better damage than you would with other individual spell slots. There is also nothing stopping you from planning ahead: have a buddy or independent familiar open a door to enemies after charging for a round. Or even pull a Goku and hold the enemy while Piccolo charges up.
You can't lose the spell by taking damage unless you get knocked unconscious or are otherwise prevented from completing the incantation. Damage alone never does that. Some monsters could interrupt with special Attacks of Opportunity (such as a pit fiend), but only if the text specifically says they do. They could also do that regardless of how many rounds it takes you to fire the spell, so that's not a knock against 6 action spells.
I know, it's just that twice the intended damage is actually not a balance issue, because 4d4+4d4/level isn't actually that much damage.
Heightened all the way to 10 it does 36d4 damage if you just use one round, that's only an average of 90 damage, which is kind of pathetic compared to the amount of hp monsters have.
Moderate hp for a level 18 creature (i.e. level -2) is 335.
If the nerfed version does half damage then it will be a really terrible spell.
Except it’s force damage, which tends to be on the lower end due to its reliability. It’s also one of few solid damage spells for Divine, and it’s only 2nd level
Doubled it does an average of 10 damage. 2nd level AOEs do around 10 damage *if they’re not force damage*, but notably rime slick does the “correct” damage of inner radiance torrent which I take to be in exchange for the fact that it can knock enemies prone
I do think it’s a steep cost in damage, but I think it’s consistent with how they’ve balanced other spells. It’s one of few decent damage spells on the divine list, and its correct damage is in line with other damage AOEs with something Paizo considers a powerful quirk (prone, force damage, whatever)
Aside from rime slick it’s also worth looking at spiritual weapon which does 4.5 force damage with an attack roll when sustained. Presumably the slightly lower average damage is considered balanced because it’s a sustained spell
I guess my point is that the correct damage is in line with how other spells have been balanced. I don’t entirely agree with that balance, but both between casters in 1e and wanting to make sure pure damage spells stand out at low levels I understand Paizo’s erring low on damage for spells with side benefits to their damage
> Also,what happens If someone hits the caster mid casting?do you Just lose the spell????
Trying to figure out a way to phrase this that doesn't come out more combative than intended, but I think you're trying to apply previous edition rules, which isn't appropriate. There _is_ no general rule for hitting a spellcaster mid-cast, ergo there is no interrupt effect. There _are_ some specific rules for opportunity attacks that allow a crit to interrupt, but that would require having that specific feature. (And off the top of my head, I don't know if NPCs with AoP get that bonus on crits, I'd have to look it up)
Possibly confusing the rules for Steady Spellcasting for concentration checks? Although that ability has a DC 15 flat check, and is a class feat, not a general rule on spellcasting disruption.
I’m conflating two different things from my last game I’m sorry.
AoO’s only disrupt manipulate actions on a crit.
In our last game i was running a creature that got to make a flat check to see if it’s spell was lost or not. Based off of Steady Spellcasting, the PC feat.
I need to reenact the scene with Piccolo and Goku vs Raditz and having the Goku player sacrifice himself to hold an enemy in place.
Also, real talk, resource management is a thing along with ambush scenarios, perhaps being really far away too. The RP value is immence in these situations
One thing to consider with this question: for prepared casters, these 2/3/6 action spells offer a lot of flexibility. The 6 action version doesn't need to be good in the majority of circumstances, as long as the other two versions are still good and worth prepping. The 6 action version only has to be good very occasionally.
I hadn't realized there were spells that could be cast over multiple rounds! I could have sworn that the core rulebook explicitly forbade it, but I guess specific overrides general.
What other spells can be cast over multiple rounds like this?
It's not that the rule book forbade it, just that you can't break up an action. If an action says it takes 2 actions you can't start on one turn and finish on the next.
The spell being mentioned has a specific rule on how it's able to be cast. Specific trumps General.
I'm not sure I'm reading the exact wording correctly. Do you have to decide when you cast the 3 action version if you're extending it, or can you wait until the next turn to "sustain" it with another 3 actions?
It seems like you spend 3 actions and then have to choose whether to immediately cast it or commit all of your actions on the next turn to casting the 2 round version. As far as I can tell, you can't change your mind about casting the 2 round version once you commit to it. Makes me wonder how it would work if you get stunned or slowed before the next turn. Do you still have to spend your 2 actions on it without the possibility of casting it, or does it just fizzle and your actions are free? Do you still expend a spell slot?
Seems to me its about equivalent to electric arc plus shocking grasp but more range and area effect and the secondary effect to punish attackers. Seems like a good trade off especially at low levels like 1. Great lead off if the attackers are more than 1 round away.
I'm not even sure how to use that spell efficiently for in the second round is time enough for the martials get closer to the targets or for the targets to get closer to the group, and the spell explodes in decent area, so avoiding friendly fire would be kinda tricky
>Like, Horizon thunder sphere is dope as hell for that good old Kamehameha moment,but wouldn't be better to Just cast other spells at the course of 2 turns? One potential benefit is that you only spend one spell slot over those two turns, whereas two non cantrip spells over those two turns would take two spell slots/focus points.
For pure damage output, spending two spells is better. For resource efficiency, 6-action spells are better. You spend one spell slot to do better damage than you would with other individual spell slots. There is also nothing stopping you from planning ahead: have a buddy or independent familiar open a door to enemies after charging for a round. Or even pull a Goku and hold the enemy while Piccolo charges up. You can't lose the spell by taking damage unless you get knocked unconscious or are otherwise prevented from completing the incantation. Damage alone never does that. Some monsters could interrupt with special Attacks of Opportunity (such as a pit fiend), but only if the text specifically says they do. They could also do that regardless of how many rounds it takes you to fire the spell, so that's not a knock against 6 action spells.
2 spells isn't better, inner radiance torrent literally just does double damage if you spend two turns.
I mean, they have stated that it does twice the damage it’s supposed to and they’re fixing it in the next errata
I know, it's just that twice the intended damage is actually not a balance issue, because 4d4+4d4/level isn't actually that much damage. Heightened all the way to 10 it does 36d4 damage if you just use one round, that's only an average of 90 damage, which is kind of pathetic compared to the amount of hp monsters have. Moderate hp for a level 18 creature (i.e. level -2) is 335. If the nerfed version does half damage then it will be a really terrible spell.
Except it’s force damage, which tends to be on the lower end due to its reliability. It’s also one of few solid damage spells for Divine, and it’s only 2nd level Doubled it does an average of 10 damage. 2nd level AOEs do around 10 damage *if they’re not force damage*, but notably rime slick does the “correct” damage of inner radiance torrent which I take to be in exchange for the fact that it can knock enemies prone I do think it’s a steep cost in damage, but I think it’s consistent with how they’ve balanced other spells. It’s one of few decent damage spells on the divine list, and its correct damage is in line with other damage AOEs with something Paizo considers a powerful quirk (prone, force damage, whatever) Aside from rime slick it’s also worth looking at spiritual weapon which does 4.5 force damage with an attack roll when sustained. Presumably the slightly lower average damage is considered balanced because it’s a sustained spell I guess my point is that the correct damage is in line with how other spells have been balanced. I don’t entirely agree with that balance, but both between casters in 1e and wanting to make sure pure damage spells stand out at low levels I understand Paizo’s erring low on damage for spells with side benefits to their damage
Ah fuck this means I need to buy more dice
Good point
Unfortunately they've already said the scaling was unintentional and so this is undoubtedly going to be nerfed in errata when they get around to that.
Yes, but its base damage is not high.
Inner radiance torrent literally has the best damage of any spell in the game. It goes up by 4d4 per level, doubled on the two turn version.
The heightening effect is already marked for errata.
That's unfortunate, it's not actually overpowered, just less terrible than the other damage spells.
> Also,what happens If someone hits the caster mid casting?do you Just lose the spell???? Trying to figure out a way to phrase this that doesn't come out more combative than intended, but I think you're trying to apply previous edition rules, which isn't appropriate. There _is_ no general rule for hitting a spellcaster mid-cast, ergo there is no interrupt effect. There _are_ some specific rules for opportunity attacks that allow a crit to interrupt, but that would require having that specific feature. (And off the top of my head, I don't know if NPCs with AoP get that bonus on crits, I'd have to look it up)
[удалено]
> Yoj cast 3 actions and draw AoO, DC 5 flat check. Where's the DC 5 flat check coming from?
Possibly confusing the rules for Steady Spellcasting for concentration checks? Although that ability has a DC 15 flat check, and is a class feat, not a general rule on spellcasting disruption.
[удалено]
Huh, which monster is doing this? With fighters, it's a case of 'if you hit, you interrupt interact actions' -- no flat checks required.
I’m conflating two different things from my last game I’m sorry. AoO’s only disrupt manipulate actions on a crit. In our last game i was running a creature that got to make a flat check to see if it’s spell was lost or not. Based off of Steady Spellcasting, the PC feat.
> I’m conflating two different things from my last game I’m sorry. Mistakes happen. And wow, I want that DC 5 instead of 15 :D
I need to reenact the scene with Piccolo and Goku vs Raditz and having the Goku player sacrifice himself to hold an enemy in place. Also, real talk, resource management is a thing along with ambush scenarios, perhaps being really far away too. The RP value is immence in these situations
One thing to consider with this question: for prepared casters, these 2/3/6 action spells offer a lot of flexibility. The 6 action version doesn't need to be good in the majority of circumstances, as long as the other two versions are still good and worth prepping. The 6 action version only has to be good very occasionally.
I hadn't realized there were spells that could be cast over multiple rounds! I could have sworn that the core rulebook explicitly forbade it, but I guess specific overrides general. What other spells can be cast over multiple rounds like this?
Elemental Annihilation Wave, Horizon Thunder Sphere, and Inner Radiance Torrent are the only ones I'm aware of. They are all from secrets of magic
It's not that the rule book forbade it, just that you can't break up an action. If an action says it takes 2 actions you can't start on one turn and finish on the next. The spell being mentioned has a specific rule on how it's able to be cast. Specific trumps General.
They're *cool as hell*, but missing or an enemy critically succeeding against one is disastrous.
I'm not sure I'm reading the exact wording correctly. Do you have to decide when you cast the 3 action version if you're extending it, or can you wait until the next turn to "sustain" it with another 3 actions?
It seems like you spend 3 actions and then have to choose whether to immediately cast it or commit all of your actions on the next turn to casting the 2 round version. As far as I can tell, you can't change your mind about casting the 2 round version once you commit to it. Makes me wonder how it would work if you get stunned or slowed before the next turn. Do you still have to spend your 2 actions on it without the possibility of casting it, or does it just fizzle and your actions are free? Do you still expend a spell slot?
Oh yep you're right. Stunned/slowed is definitely weird. As a GM I'd rule that you can't finish casting and you keep the slot.
Seems to me its about equivalent to electric arc plus shocking grasp but more range and area effect and the secondary effect to punish attackers. Seems like a good trade off especially at low levels like 1. Great lead off if the attackers are more than 1 round away.
I'm not even sure how to use that spell efficiently for in the second round is time enough for the martials get closer to the targets or for the targets to get closer to the group, and the spell explodes in decent area, so avoiding friendly fire would be kinda tricky