Change the DISPEL mechanics...

[VanillaPudding]

Lesser dispel - The caster attempts to strip, and possibly steal magic from the target(s). This spell can strip a maximum of 1 spell / 3 caster levels. The caster steals the first stripped spell.

SF Abjuration - Increase the TOTAL stripped spells by 1, if checks succeed, and stolen spells by 1 (two total).

GSF abjuration - Increase the TOTAL stripped spells by 1, if checks succeed, and stolen spells by 2(three total)


Dispel magic - The caster attempts to strip, and possibly steal magic from the target(s). This spell can strip a maximum of 1 spell / 2 caster levels. The caster steals the first TWO  stripped spells.

SF Abjuration - Increase the TOTAL stripped spells by 1, if checks succeed, and stolen spells by 1 (three total).

GSF abjuration - Increase the TOTAL stripped spells by 1, if checks succeed, and stolen spells by 2(four total)

Duration: Magic is stripped(or stolen, doesn't matter) for a total of 1 round / 2 caster levels. This is increased by 1 round / 2 CL for GSF abjuration. Upon expiration, the spells return to the target at their INNATE caster level.


Upon being dispelled, targets are immune to the effects of dispel magic for 5 rounds.


SECONDLY - Remove arcane leech and just make it part of the changes for abjuration to be more cool but also less CRUSHINGLY RANDOM

[The Crimson Magician]

I agree that dispel mechanics could use a look at. The changes/improvements proposed here seem like they could address some or most of the issues surrounding the spells.

[Pandip]

My issue with dispel isn't the amount of things dispelled (though that is a factor) so much as it is the randomness of what gets dispelled.

Having my animal buffs stripped is annoying but fine; I can deal with that. Having my stoneskin and haste and displacement and II stripped is absolutely brutal, especially if it's cast by a mage in the party.

It'd be neat if it prioritized lower level spells first. But I don't know how to balance that to avoid the instinct for players to chug meaningless level 1 buffs to help buffer their better, higher level stuff.

[Egon the Monkey]

I like the idea, but what's your argument in favour, VP? It sounds like you don't like the randomness, and if so, I agree. It's like a spell that does 1d100 no-save damage. Might do nothing, might pretty much oneshot you.

I think it could use a look, as it's the only spell that gets more dangerous the more defences you have up. And the only defences that work are Globe, SR and Arcane Defence, which are all super hard counters. Even direct damage spells have the defence of 'hitpoints'. It's extremely non-fun when you chug your emergency stash and then some random CL3 Dispel removes the lot. Currently a Dispel has a 50% chance to strip any buff of the same CL, making it super efficient.I can dispel your buffs faster than you can put them up.

Be careful, it might break mages
Any change would need to let Dispels still function as a way to reliably strip Clarity/Shell off of melee characters so you can drop your disabling Mind spell on them. If you can only knock off one spell, then it gives you an edge but it almost certainly won't take off their immunity to your specialism. That said, there's the code used in Feeblemind and Lifestealer, where a spell auto-removes the thing that blocked it.

I think the changes here would actually make it more random, as a Lesser Dispel wand can suddenly luck out and net you, personally the enemy's stoneskin. The idea that it suppresses the magic for X rounds rather then permanently removes it is clever though.

The idea of making a target immune to dispel for a few rounds after a hit would be good in terms of pacing things and making a big strong dispel better than wand spam.

So here's a couple of ideas, which could work together.

Add the spell circle in to the caster level check.
That way, a  CL7 Stoneskin is DC 11+7+4=22 vs the 3+1d20 on a Lesser Dispel wand. That's only a 1/20 chance not a 1/4. Suddenly, you have much better odds on dispelling the low level spells than then high-level ones.

Give it a spell-breach style order and spell limit
Spell Breaches are guaranteed, but much more restrained as they only take down a few things. Imagine if Dispel worked like Spell Breach in that it took things out in a fixed order, starting with the weakest, and to a maximum number of spells removed. e.g. Shell then Endure Elements, then Shield, then Resist Elements then Clarity. Arcane Defence Abjuration could again reduce that cap, SF/GSF could boost it.

If I was building a dispel order list, It'd go:

• 'Negative status effects'
• 'The spells that stop mages from killing you'
• 'The spells that stop a horde of melee killing you'
• 'Attack buffs'
• 'Utility spells like Jump and Camouflage'

That way:

• It remains a good move to let you go Dispel->Hold Person->Eat shit on a Claritied barbarian.
• On the flip side, someone with Lesser Mind Blank Up probably won't lose it to the first dispel unless it's from a GSF abjurer
• If you Dispel someone and Hold them, a second dispel is most likely to just break the Hold, meaning there's counter play in there and a costly way to remove Hold/Fear.
• If it's a fixed list, you can't chug stuff like 'Splendor and camouflage potions on a Fighter' just to hope they are the ones randomly targeted. With VP's proposed mechanics, my gank buff stack would include 'every random bit of crap I have', as if 1/3 of my buffs are useless, 1/3 of the dispels will do nothing to harm me. If it's a fixed order, there's no benefit to drinking