# Spell Conversion



## phloog (Jan 17, 2008)

First time post - redirect/correct me if I've erred...

I am moving to EOM rules for magic in my world, but unlike with 4E I think I can do it without abandoning my current campaign.  To do this, I want to include the original spells from the PHB and other sources, but with MP costs and requirements (You must have Evoke Fire and ..... to be able to cast Flame Strike).  To make things consistent, and since the original spells tend to be more powerful than similar EOM spells, I want to put in place an additional rule that any spell from those sources must be taken as signature, and so you can't make changes to them...they are what they are in the book.  If you can create something just like the spell using EOM, then you can use all the EOM rules.

There are some spells that defy conversion, or seem unusually powerful compared to EOM.  One of these is Magic Missile.  There is no roll to hit, there is no save, it just does damage.  And as you go up in level, you get more instant damage 'for free'.  To balance this a bit, here are the things I'm thinking of ruling, and if anyone with EOM experience would like to give me input I'd appreciate it.

Magic Missile - must have Evoke Force.  MP =3 (base).  must be taken as signature. Works exactly as it does in the book, except that when you reach a level where another missile would be allowed, you only get it if you pay 1 additional MP.  So you can't throw five missiles unless you're 9th level (IIRC), even if you have (3 + 4 extra missiles) 7 MP to spend.  Once you're 9th or higher, 7 points gives you the max # of missiles.

7 points would be roughly the cost of a 3rd level spell by the old rules, so it costs what a Fireball would cost....seems expensive, but it's almost certain damage.

Thoughts...too much cost...too little?


----------



## sirwmholder (Jan 17, 2008)

Ack! It ate my post... oh well... one more time.

Let me be the first to say Welcome .

Now let's get down to business.  Yes, there are some effects that can not be replicated using EoM... however, you need to ask yourself is that a good thing or a bad thing.  For instance it means there are no absolute spells (Knock)... there are no save or die spells (Finger of Death).  In my mind that is a very good thing.

EoM is mostly balanced when it is the stand alone Magic system in the campaign.  There is no good way to balance pre-made spells that I have been able to find.  That being said I would probably use the following as a guide to determine the rough MP cost of a spell I just had to convert over.

(Spell Level +1) x2 = Amount of Magic Points

or use the following

SL : MP
0 : 0-2
1 : 3-4
2 : 5-6
3 : 7-8
4 : 9-10
5 : 11-12
6 : 13-14
7 : 15-16
8 : 17-18
9 : 19-20

Scaling spells that go up with level is a big no-no in EoM.  I would probably freeze a spell at it's introductory damage and not allow any scaling ability.

Hope this helps,
Good Gaming,
William Holder


----------



## phloog (Jan 17, 2008)

Thanks for the welcome.

You're almost certainly right in terms of mechanics and balance.   My biggest problem is I am, at heart, still a diehard fan of D&D in terms of the 'feel' of the game.  Moving to EOM is still right for me, but I want to keep as many as possible of the traditional D&D spells - which is why Magic Missile was an initial concern.  

It seems you personally don't double the level, but use (Level+1) doubled - - I may do that as well, but was leaning toward (Level doubled) +1.  Is the more common conversion used by people (Level +1) * 2 or (Level *2) + 1 ?

I too am rejecting any spell automatically scaling 'with level', as you say, but I'm wondering: do you disagree with my thought of allowing multiple missiles (2 at 3rd, 3 at 5th, 4 at 7th, and a max of 5 at 9th), even though I am charging them 1 MP per missile for it?  It's not so much scaling with level (which per originally essentially comes free) as it is allowing only one modification (extra missiles)

I saw the limit on number of missiles as adequately offsetting the instant damage.  

At 5th level I can cast (going from memory here) an Evoke Fire 4 / Gen 1 - - short targeted fire attack for 5d6 fire damage, costing 5MP, or I can cast (assume only doubling level and adding one for base cost) an old-book Magic Missile for 3 MP, and add 2 MP for the other two missiles, doing 3d4+3 distributed among one or more targets.  

The first averages 17.5 damage (max 30), but requires either an attack or allows a save.  The second allows no save, but only does an average of 10.5 damage (Max 15).

In addition, to actually cast it you must 'use up a slot' for a signature spell.

I'm probably missing some glaring error that makes it overpowered, but with the sig requirement and the cost it doesn't feel outlandish.  And the thought of playing a game I'll call D&D where you can't cast a magic missile just seems wrong


----------



## sirwmholder (Jan 17, 2008)

Ah... so I see (said the blind man)... the thing to keep in mind is EoM damage is balanced on 1MP = 1d6 with no modifiers.  If you up it so 1MP nets you 3d4+3 then EoM Evoke spells become obsolete in favor of this "old" magic.

I assume most people use (Spell Level x 2) = MP.  To me it just feels right to use (Spell Level +1) x 2... granted (Spell Level x 2) +1 = the lower end of the chart I put up .

Just something to keep in mind,
William Holder


----------



## phloog (Jan 17, 2008)

Thanks, but I might still be making things unclear. 

When I said '2 at 3rd, 3 at fifth...' I was referring to the TOTAL number of missiles that could be fired.  It's not additive - I'm not suggesting that 1st level is one missile, 3rd level is (1+2) 3 missiles, 5th level is (1+2+3) 6 missiles, etc.  The most you'll ever unleash is 5, and only if you're 9th level or higher AND spend additional MP.

So the 1 MP doesn't buy you 3d4+3 damage, it buys you another 1d4+1 - - each missile does 1d4+1.  So while in EOM each MP is standardized at 1d6 damage, these additional MPs only get you 1d4+1 - giving the same damage per instance (3.5), but with a max of only 5 for the missiles, but 6 for EOM spells.

Clarifying (I hope!) table: (EDITED - Did it wrong, since they are all signature you can't CHOOSE to buy fewer than max missiles)

1st level: 3 MP nets you 1 missile for 1d4+1 damage
3rd level: 4 MP gets you 2 missiles (total 2d4+2)
5th level: FIVE MP for 3 missiles (3d4+3)
7th level: SIX MP for 4 missiles (4d4+4)
9th level: 7 MP for 5 missiles (5d4 +5)

In terms of damage, you're spending 3 MP for the first 1d4+1 - FAR more expensive than EOM - - if it were an Evoke Force 3 spell, it would do 3d6!

For each additional 1d4+1 (to a maximum of five), you're paying 1MP each.

The more I think about it, this seems to more than offset the 'instant' nature of the damage (despite being a bit against the spirit of EOM), since it does so much less per MP spent.

The other thing I like about it is that currently wizards tend to always pack Magic Missiles, even when much higher level.  This won't annul that but it might reduce it a bit, since for that same 7MP spent on 5d4+5 damage you could do up to 8d6 damage in other forms.  Add to that the possibility of 'on the fly casting' for EOM magic and magic missiles might well become a 'child's toy'.


----------



## sirwmholder (Jan 17, 2008)

phloog said:
			
		

> ...In addition, to actually cast it you must 'use up a slot' for a signature spell...



This isn't really a limiting factor... a Mage can gain 3 more Signature Spells by spending a feat.  But more so with this spell a Mage doesn't need another Evoke Signature Spell because this is better than anything else he could come up with any way... and you have like 6 Signature Spells at level 1.

William Holder


----------



## sirwmholder (Jan 17, 2008)

phloog said:
			
		

> ...In terms of damage, you're spending 3 MP for the first 1d4+1 - FAR more expensive than EOM - - if it were an Evoke Force 3 spell, it would do 3d6!...
> 
> ...The other thing I like about it is that currently wizards tend to always pack Magic Missiles, even when much higher level.  This won't annul that but it might reduce it a bit, since for that same 7MP spent on 5d4+5 damage you could do up to 8d6 damage in other forms.  Add to that the possibility of 'on the fly casting' for EOM magic and magic missiles might well become a 'child's toy'.



I gotcha now... true the damage would be slightly higher in EoM if it is a single target within 30ft.  Now say your target is 100 ft. away you extend the range in EoM (+1 MP)... and higher levels when you wish to hit multiple targets by adding Discerning (+1 MP)... though each target still has to be within a 10ft radius or else the cost goes up again... however at that point the damage is about the same... it becomes a flavor thing for either 1d4+1 automatic hit or 1d6 ranged touch attack.  Given the verisitility of Magic Missiles... medium range, multiple or single target... I think it falls into line with the MP cost you propose using above. 

Hope that helps,
William Holder

PS ~ I had to quote the last paragraph because I love saying, "Magic Missiles are mere Child's Play" when introducing EoM to a new group .


----------



## RangerWickett (Jan 17, 2008)

0 MP gets you a touch range, d6 damage spell (a la disrupt undead)

1 MP gets you a 30 ft., d6 damage spell with a save or requiring an attack roll (akin to a short-range, save-allowing magic missile)

2 MP I think would be fair for a 30 ft., d6 damage spell that allows no save and needs no attack roll (so a shorter range magic missile)

3 MP gets you to medium range, so now you're identical to a normal magic missile. So I think we're at a good baseline. 3 MP = caster level 1 magic missile. That's, what, half the MP you get for that level, so it's equivalent to being a 1st level wizard.

When you're 9th level, though, you've got a lot of MP to spare, and you probably wouldn't scoff at a 5d6, medium range, no save spell for 7 MP. Though at this point, you can actually do better than magic missile, and go up to 11 MP (I believe mages get an MP Limit boost of +2?) for 9d6 damage.

Hmm. That's too good, actually.

Actually, now that I think about it, it might be better to charge 2 MP per extra die of damage if you want the spell to be no save.

I hope I'm being clear. You'll have to forgive me. It's been a good 2 years since I've used EOM myself, since I've been limited to core rules while writing War of the Burning Sky.


----------



## Primitive Screwhead (Jan 18, 2008)

RW... at least your agreeing with the last post you had on the MM issue 

ploog, check out the excellent list at High Arcana wiki, the site has a compiled listing of most of the conversions and new spells that have been bantered about here.

As to costing RAW spells, I go with the (level+1) x 2 myself.


----------



## phloog (Jan 18, 2008)

Wow...how to thank you for the link without starting a flame war or the perception of same:

Thanks, Primitive Screwhead?
Thanks, Primitive?
Thanks, Screwie?

I'll leave it as 'Thanks' - - I'm not sure exactly where I'll land on this, but it seems to me that if i'm close to any of the ideas here i won't unbalance everything.

Actually, I shouldn't worry too much about that, since I have a custom class in my campaign that knows the day of their death, and that has somehow not unbalanced things.


----------



## sirwmholder (Jan 18, 2008)

Aye... I had forgot about that wiki... I may have to start filling it out with some spells my players and I have come up with in the past year or so  

/evil grin
William Holder

PS ~ phloog, the people on these boards are great and after reading some of the things they come up with in their games I only wished I lived closer


----------



## Primitive Screwhead (Jan 19, 2008)

phloog said:
			
		

> ...I'll leave it as 'Thanks' - -




Any of the above... I find my screen-name tends to cut down on the flak... after all, how can I be insulted?   

I look forward to seeing your additions to the community!


----------



## phloog (Jan 31, 2008)

Thanks all, and my apologies but good answers/discussions tend to drive more questions.

Consider a spell like 'Knock', which acts upon a specific class of objects.  If Knock in the normal rules created a force that pulled on the door, or summoned a mystical lime golem that opened the door, I could create them in EoM.  But Knock does a very specific one thing, and via a mechanism that I can seem to find in EoM.

Does everyone just drop these spells, so wizards who want to open doors have to create the form of that opening from existing lists?  

I was considering trying to figure out for each spell from the PH that I honestly could not recreate in EoM the specific spell list or lists that are 'close enough', and allow players to take those spells if and only if:

1) They have those lists I have determined,
2) They take it as a signature spell only
3) They pay (level +1) x 2  Magic Points

Will this work?  Could I also consider these 'ancient and mysterious formulae', so there would be a 4th requirement

4) The formula for the spell would have to be found on scroll, book, etc.

I know that I'm risking balance, but I'm still stuck on that idea of keeping the 'hallmark' D&D spells in place.


----------



## Primitive Screwhead (Jan 31, 2008)

I handle the Knock spell in one of two ways.. 
> infuse a skill booster
> Summon a 'helper'

THe first is pretty straightforward, the second took me some time to figure out Justin Coopers Shadow Constructs was the result. Basically I costed out adding NPC levels to the constructs 

This would allow my character to summon a 'rogue' construct with a decent skill list, and even Infuse him for better capability if needed.

 Unfortunately the game this was made for kinda splintered shortly after I developed this, so it hasn't seen real playtesting.

That being said, my campaign has EoM and core spells side by side. I don't see why a pure port of a core spell could be done as a EoM signature spell with a cost of level+1*2 MPs...
I would require them to be signature spells simply to make it easier to track.

My preference would be to challenge the player to come up with an EoM variant. Some of the most entertaining threads here consisted of 4 to 5 ideas of how to make a given effect


----------



## sirwmholder (Feb 1, 2008)

Primitive Screwhead said:
			
		

> ...My preference would be to challenge the player to come up with an EoM variant. Some of the most entertaining threads here consisted of 4 to 5 ideas of how to make a given effect



Lol, like Spiritual Weapon? I stand by Evoke (Metal) .

William Holder


----------

