Signup
Welcome to... Canonfire! World of GreyhawK
Features
Postcards from the Flanaess
Adventures
in Greyhawk
Cities of
Oerth
Deadly
Denizens
Jason Zavoda Presents
The Gord Novels
Greyhawk Wiki
#greytalk
JOIN THE CHAT
ON DISCORD
    Canonfire :: View topic - AD&D 1e spell - Citadel Restoration
    Canonfire Forum Index -> Greyhawk- AD&D 1st Edition
    AD&D 1e spell - Citadel Restoration
    Author Message
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 10, 2009 6:39 pm  

    So, is this a wizard spell or a cleric spell?

    Or is it an illusionist spell or a druid spell? Wink Laughing
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Aug 17, 2004
    Posts: 924
    From: Computer Desk

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:10 pm  

    Interesting spell Shocked

    Allow me to give it some thought before I post specific ideas Confused

    However at first blush; some possible problems that jump out.
    - I like how you made it high level; you know some players will seek to become mage mike holmes. I truly hated the example of tenser's floating disc used to carry stone as if a mage would ever consent to become a common construction labourer. rolleyes
    - I like to leave at least a minium of 1% chance of collapse for anything after nothing is perfect even the natural fortifications can collapse. I would prefer to use a D100/-5% per level/collapse chance with lvl 20/1%

    IE: 14th lvl (100-70=30%) collapse chance.

    - I would like to see a more impressive material component included (earth elemental stone). As a rationale for why rulers aren't demanding the mages fix their citadels. Earth elemental stone is dangerous to acquire and therfore rare which explains why mages aren't dragged from ruin to ruin. Earth elementals also possess the ability of movement which I envison with the spell; organic movement as it repairs itself.

    Hope that helps...
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 03, 2009
    Posts: 74
    From: The Horned Society

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:40 am  

    So is this a variation on the spell stone shape?And is it restricted to citadels,castles and wooden structures?What about stone golems/earth elementals,does this spell have the ability to "heal" them after taking severe damage?
    And what about naturalistic stuctures,like carved out caverns,mines and homes built ontop of a massive tree?Don't get me wrong,i'm not knocking your idea in any way,i just feel that there's a lot of questions that we're left out,coming up with your own rules on the fly is all part of the fun of any d&d game,but you have to consider the impact on the campaign when it comes to spells,by that i mean,how many carpenters,masoners & brickmakers would appreciate some mage coming in and putting them out of any long term contracts with the local ruler (not to mention any potential union clashes),after all,it was the stonemasons that pretty much built everything from the ground up,them's a lotta toes to be steppin on.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:52 am  

    I think some of that can be reconciled by the fact that the King, himself, wouldn't want to step on all of those toes; various masons guilds and unions.

    Not to mention that the magician able to cast the spell would be a fairly high level. Would the King want to "tick off" the local (or nearby) magical guilds by attempting to force such "ranking members" to do his will, against their own?

    I think they'd be "safe" from rulers attempting that action. Though that wouldn't apply to maniacs, mind you. Confused
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 03, 2009
    Posts: 74
    From: The Horned Society

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:17 pm  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:

    Not to mention that the magician able to cast the spell would be a fairly high level. Would the King want to "tick off" the local (or nearby) magical guilds by attempting to force such "ranking members" to do his will, against their own?


    Then again,if it we're a remote keep/castle out in the middle of nowhere and a court magician or a peace-time war-wizard we're the one casting the spell,i believe that would be fairly sound.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:24 pm  

    Ahh! That too is an entirely different scenario.

    Under those conditions, the magician would definitely use the spell and be well rewarded for it too. Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 03, 2009
    Posts: 74
    From: The Horned Society

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 11, 2009 10:56 pm  

    Wow,somebody actually agrees with me on here for a change!While i think it's a great spell,i think it could use a bit of editing,to fine-tune it a little,maybe a slight name change like i dunno..."structural restoration" would be good,i say that because a citadel is only one type of structure,as oppossed to any given number of structures available.One fine note in spellmaking is that you cant avoid even the smallest details or this will raise 101,901,834 questions by the players squabbling over every aspect of how the spell is cast and what it can and can't do.I'm telling you this to save a lot of time and a multitude of headaches if your a DM with players who can't always agree to disagree.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:10 am  

    Why not consider different names, rather than I, II, III, etc.?

    For instance; Structural Restoration 7th level, Citadel Restoration 8th, etc.

    The 7th level is so named because it can be used on houses and other such buildings. The 8th level can be used on very large buildings, and then a differently named 9th level for castles and such.

    Each spell could also effect only certain types of building materials.

    Just a thought. Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Mon Oct 12, 2009 7:54 am  

    There you go, cheating the lowly working class. Evil Grin

    Actually, I don't see any special need for the lower spell to be less "permanent" than any of the others. Its "lower level" because it will only work on "wooden" structures, for example.

    It could be used on a worker's wooden cottage, for example, but not on a stone wall. A magician might use such a spell on the homes of his personal laborers. They provide him with good service and he takes care of them in return. Its not as though he would have to use the spell more than every ten years or so anyway.

    The cottage is restored to new condition and gradually wears away just as it did the first time it was built.

    Another great way for a wizard to ensure loyalty among his servants. Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 03, 2009
    Posts: 74
    From: The Horned Society

    Send private message
    Mon Oct 12, 2009 12:12 pm  

    How about minor,lesser & greater structural restoration,or you could personalize it simaler to "mordenkainen's sword or melf's acid arrow."i mean after all you don't have to be in the circle of eight to personalize it,but it would proabably help. Laughing

    Also,there should be a counter-spell,something like structural deterioration
    as a reverse. as far as your spell being uneffected by dispel magic,you have to consider spells with roughly the same effect that have a much greater capacity...
    CF Admin

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 1445
    From: Wichita, KS, USA

    Send private message
    Mon Oct 12, 2009 9:07 pm  

    Nice spell :D I'd bump the casting time to something like 3 turns to 3 hours or somesuch: this isn't something that should be an easy spell to cast, and certainly not one you'd ever be using in "real time" (combat rounds). I'd also increase the area of effect, because even a 25th level archmage is going to have to cast the spell multiple times to affect an entire structure (and its dungeons). If you don't want the spell to be subject to Dispel Magic or Mordy's Disjunction, then make the duration Instantaneous instead of Permanent. I'd also bump the M component up into something that's rare, expensive, or both (the heart of a xorn, a 25,000 gp gem of some earthy sort, etc.).

    Have you considered if this spell can be used to repair a Daern's Instant Fortress?

    You might post this over to Knights-n-Knaves @ http://www.knights-n-knaves.com/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=9 for some additional input, too.

    re: Acid Arrow's reversed version of the spell: I think it's called disintegrate :D :D :D
    _________________
    Allan Grohe (grodog@gmail.com)
    http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/greyhawk.html


    Last edited by grodog on Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:18 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:57 pm  

    I'll second what grodog said. The spell ought to have a long casting time, plus be very expensive component-wise. This is a quite powerful spell, as it effectively makes a fortification unbreachable if a wizard of appropriate level is on hand to deal with the damage using this spell. Perhaps a casting time of two hours, plus 2 turns per 10" cube. Make it a real ritual type spell. The other "builder spells", like wall of stone, are very limited for their level. You gotta work to build the good stuff. Wink I like the xorn component, but 25,000 g.p. might be overly much, though around 10,000 g.p. wouldn't be. Even a wish spell will not create an entire permanent castle, let alone permanently repair one that has been reduced to rubble.

    You could make the components more exotic even still so as to reflect the cost. A pound of earth that was once inhabited by the spirit of an earth elemental, a pound of dried xorn blood, and an iron nail quenched in sweat from a laborer who has done a hard days work. That last bit might be harder to collect than you might think, seeing as the average laborer is probably not wanting to give up things like hair, fingernails, tears, or sweat to a spell-worker for some "unnatural purpose", as such things are often the components of "hexes". Laughing

    I'd also change the Area of Effect to "one 10' cube per level within a 100' radius".

    Then you can use the spell to patch a structure that has damage in various places as well as those that have been fully demolished. For fully demolished structures, I'd also limit to spell to an all or nothing limit, as a half rebuilt structure is likely to collapse anyways. Some partial structures could be rebuilt though, such as a full tower and wall section that is part of a continuous wall- anything that is freestanding basically. It would however be practically impossible to partially rebuild a fortified manor, as most of the support structure of such buildings is usually tied together in major ways. The DM is, of course, the final arbitrator as to whether the spell will work or not on whatever structure.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Wed Oct 14, 2009 3:00 am  

    You will note however that the casting time of the spell is one day per 1,000 cubic feet, and that only 1,000 cubic feet can be created per day. I assume that to mean one work day, not literally 24 hours. Wink That seems like a substantial amount of time, but if you look at the construction time of fortifications it is really quite good, and "only" requires one person of sufficient level to cast the spell. Better still, the spell creates stronger than normal buildings. It is a pretty powerful spell for 6th level. And yes, better than dwarven-made. I blame the elven leg-humping designers. Happy I think the spell is rather low on the level side of things. I might go as high as 8th level for what it can do.

    While your spell is of higher level, it does repair or even throw structures back up in record time, which is a pretty powerful effect.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:30 am  

    It would only be temporary. Creation is so much harder than destruction. Wink
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 03, 2009
    Posts: 74
    From: The Horned Society

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 12:36 am  

    grodog wrote:
    re: Acid Arrow's reversed version of the spell: I think it's called disintegrate :D :D :D


    Ya know,i've never used a disentigration spell on anything other than living tissue...does that make me a bad person??? Razz Razz Razz
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 03, 2008
    Posts: 80
    From: NW Indiana

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:10 am  

    I like the spell but can I add another component? What about age? Should age be a factor? Or is the spell going to allow a spellcaster the ability to raise ancient building out of the dust? Just a thought.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:18 am  

    Many Roman structures are still with us . . . two thousand years later. Wink

    And the Romans did not reinforce their concrete with steel as we do. Our modern day structures will last even longer then their's have.

    If nothing remains of an ancient fortress/castle (for example) but dust, then it should be so old that no one alive "today" should even know that it once existed. So how could they use any spell to bring it back?

    It would depend on the building materials, but the age of any "still visible/discernable" structure shouldn't present any problems. Cool
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 03, 2008
    Posts: 80
    From: NW Indiana

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 6:44 am  

    Point taken Mystic -Scholar, but we have all seen the ruins of ancient Greece or Egypt where there is nothing left except the foundations. Should a spell caster come along and in a few hours restore the structure? In game terms, when the players arrive at an ancient ruins, should they be able to restore the ancient castle/temple/keep/complex over a few days? I was just proposing the idea that an age component be added like speak with dead or resurrect.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 7:12 am  

    I understand your point, however I believe that a spell like Speak with the Dead must take into account the proclivity of the deceased individual.

    If the soul is immortal, then why can't you "speak" to this person thousands of years later? Because the deceased has lost all interest in "the world of men" and has no interest in "speaking" to anyone or being "found" by anyone. The same could not be said for, or applied to, stone littering the ground.

    That the foundation still exist and can be seen and explored shows that more than just dust remains. To bring a building "back" one has to know what it looked like. After all, the spell calls upon the stones to "reform" as it were . . . reform what? What was already there. The spell caster would have to know, or have an idea, of what the structure was, or looked like. The foundation can supply that, as our archeological magazines today clearly show.

    Its obvious that without the foundation the spell caster could never determine this, nor even know that a "building" once existed "here." With the foundation, however, certain determinations could be made and the structure could be revived.

    I acquired my CDL 20 years ago. I started driving full time 15 years ago. Before that, I grew up a Bricklayer and Mason. I am fifth generation, the only one. The average age of bricklayers in the U.S. is 57, (I'm 50) no one is really learning the trade anymore. Of all the bricklayers I know, only one is third generation (grandfather) and many of the others are second generation (their fathers were bricklayers).

    There is no "trick" I do not know, or haven't been taught. If you check the Times Picayune newspaper in New Orleans, you will see that it was my Great-great-Grandfather and his sons who built all of those churches that you "tourists" like to visit in the French Quarter.

    If the foundation exist, the spell will work. Subject to the capabilities of the spell caster.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 03, 2008
    Posts: 80
    From: NW Indiana

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:38 am  

    That is kinda what I was getting at with the "dust". If a building falls out of use and falls into disrepair, it is common for the locals to "pilfer" building materials. It was a common occurance in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire. So does the spell "create" the new building materials? I am not against the spell or it's use. I actually find it very intriguing and would like to see a variation such as Create ....(tower/keep). But if I were to allow it in my game I think that I would add a time component, such as the older the building the higher the level the caster has to be or perhaps based on when the damage was done. Just thought I would add another perspective. Happy

    Last edited by Lord_Percard on Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:12 am; edited 1 time in total
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 03, 2008
    Posts: 80
    From: NW Indiana

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 10:11 am  

    Duh sorry, reread the post and realized that JHSII was not trying to have the spell create something from nothing but rather mend/ repair something that is already present.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 1:39 pm  

    That's quite true. I was simply replying to your query about "dust."

    Brick, cement, masonry, concrete . . . all are slightly different, thus they are called differently. However, all are basically made of "dust," pure and simple. Ever open a bag of Portland?

    Its a very fine powder and the "hardening" is a chemical process, by the way. Portland hardens by means of hydration not dehydration. It begins to harden the moment the water touches it.

    I don't see why, if all that remains is "dust," that said dust cannot be reformed into the previous structure. Unless the surmise is that modern science can do what archaic magic cannot, to wit; make bricks, concrete and stone from dust? Confused
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    CF Admin

    Joined: Jun 29, 2001
    Posts: 1445
    From: Wichita, KS, USA

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 2:45 pm  

    FWIW, I fully expected that the spell would be able to repair 1000-year-old-ruins that were mostly just foundations and collapsed dungeons. I like that idea a lot, in fact.

    Jay: make it so! :D
    _________________
    Allan Grohe (grodog@gmail.com)
    http://www.greyhawkonline.com/grodog/greyhawk.html
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 4:00 pm  

    Sun baked bricks go back a very long ways. What we term "fired brick" is a process that began 7500 years ago. Back then the temperatures reached around 900 to 1000 degrees. Today brick are "fired" at 2500 degrees or more -- if they are "fire brick," used to build the insides of fireplaces and such.

    7500 years ago, the brick masons who accomplished this were considered "common" and "uneducated," and quite a few social steps beneath scribes, scholars, priests and magicians.

    Surely if "uneducated barbarians" could accomplish this (stone/concrete/brick buildings) with their very limited knowledge of science, then surely powerful magicians of Oerth can accomplish it with powerful magics. Wink

    This "dust" shall once again be raised into an imposing edifice, Allan! Evil Grin Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2002
    Posts: 948
    From: Sky Island, So Cal

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:13 pm  
    Re: AD&D 1e spell - Citadel Restoration

    JHSII wrote:
    Citadel Restoration
    Level:7
    Alteration
    Duration: Permanent
    Area of Effect: 1 cube / level

    Explanation / Description: This spell restores the condition of a building, castle, or other construction to that of when it was originally completed.


    I am thinking about this in terms of power level.
    There aren't really any other similar 1E spells of 7th level to compare it to, but I am thinking of two reasonably similar alteration spells of 6th level and 8th level that provide nice "boundaries".

    At 6th level, we have Guards and Wards
    Duration 6 turns per level
    AoE 10 foot radius / (level of caster +1)

    At 8th level, we have Glassteel
    Duration Permanent
    AoE 10 pounds per caster level, one object


    Given this comparison, I think affecting a large structure, permanently, at 7th level is too powerful. I would favor a long duration, but not permanent.

    I would keep the AoE that you have for the spell, but make the duration more like 1 day per caster level.

    If the structure has been damaged, I would say it is restored to 100% of structural points for 1 day per level, and thereafter loses 10% of its structural points per day until it returns to its pre-casting state.
    _________________
    My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Thu Oct 15, 2009 8:40 pm  

    If the spell restores the stone, why does the stone need to "wear away" at more than a normal rate?

    Fire created the first masonry to build the castle, magic created the second masonry structure. The castle would last as long as it did the first time. Evil
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 03, 2008
    Posts: 80
    From: NW Indiana

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:40 am  

    I would have to say Glassteel would be a much more powerful spell. You are giving glass charateristics that it does not normally have and making the effects permanent. The limitation is the amount that the caster can effect.

    Per Mystic Scholar, you are not giving the stone or brick a different characteristic than it had prior to the casting but like Glassteel the effect is permanent.

    So the spells have duration in common but the creation is different.


    Last edited by Lord_Percard on Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:44 am; edited 1 time in total
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 03, 2008
    Posts: 80
    From: NW Indiana

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:43 am  

    I agree Grodog, I think that is why I "read" into the spell and went with the idea of creating structures from "dust". I just wanted to place some limitations on the spell by making a relationship between the lvl of the caster and how old the "ruins" are.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:59 am  

    As to old ruins and them only being foundations, that is usually because the other stone has been carted away to build something else. The missing stone didn't turn to dust or anything. Wink

    JHSII's spell accounts for the needed materials being present, though it is probably time to revamp the description and make it more specific regarding what is required, and what the spell can and cannot do.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Journeyman Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 13, 2008
    Posts: 184
    From: Houston Texas

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 16, 2009 3:16 pm  

    I agree on most of the points brought up in things thread but I while disagree with the specifics of the material components argument while agreeing with its basic premise.

    The material components of a spell should be symbolic of the spell itself, for example, the material component of a fireball is a lump of sulfur which is associated with hellfire, the material component of a identify spell is a large pearl, pearls are associated with wisdom and the material component.

    The material component for a higher level spell should typically be something that is costly but not necessarily something extra-planner. For example a perfect 1/1000 scale model of the keep being restored carved from platinum (consumed in the casting of course) would be a good idea, especially since platinum sis both rarte (and thus costly and extreamly hard. Or maybe the material component takes the form of specially inscribed geomantic sigils engraved into the walls every hundred yards, these sigils could take the form of minor spells themsleves that require their own castings thus mitigating the need for altering the other aspects of the spell, except for the duration, I agree with Grodog, change it to Instantaneous.

    All that being said, the material components you listed are a good start but I would recommend amping them up a bit. Maybe the brass nails are inscribed with runes and the wood from a rare tree. Possibly the wood comes from a Druids sacred grove and the pieces of stone come from a haunted castle, thus introducing a bit of moral dilemma into the spell.

    A bit of reading on castle construction itself may give a good idea on where to start. I would also recommend reading the Golden Bough written by an early anthropologist named James Frazier. The first section of the book deals with sympathetic magic as well as The Invisible Eagle written by I don't Remember which is about Nazi Occultism and specifically deals with Geomancy in a chapter about the castle Heinrich Himmler built to be the headquarters of the SS.
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 16, 2009 4:40 pm  

    I rarely bother with discussions on spell components simply because I often disagree with them. What does platinum have to do with stone? Nothing.

    JHSII's components are just fine. The only difficultly should be rarity; not a common stone, wood or nail. If "common uneducated" men can manufacture the building materials that created the tower in the first place, then magic can recreate, or "renew" them.

    If I use the spell it will be 4th level, no higher. The material components will be "special" and the only qualification will be how much area can be repaired in a single day, which will be dependent upon the spell caster's level. It will be permanent, as the stone has been renewed, and it will "wear away" at the same rate as new construction.

    If a common, idiot, ditch-digging moron can manufacture the building materials to begin with, then it doesn't take a genius, all-powerful, god-like magician to renew the damn thing. Its simply not realistic, a.k.a. believable.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 16, 2009 6:39 pm  

    4th level? Surely this spell is more powerful than wall of stone, a fifth level spell, which only creates a 1/4' thick, 4'x5' stone wall per level of the caster. And it can be dispelled. I'll have to assume that JHSII's spell cannot be dispelled once it has done its work. If it could be then it would be a rather poor spell.

    Also, a mason is skilled worker, not a ditch-digging idiot. Engineers/architects are also skilled. One could argue that a wizard who doesn't even have at least a rudimentary knowledge of masonry/architecture/engineering couldn't even cast the spell. That's where sympathetic magic comes in though, in the form of components- a nail quenched in the sweat of a laborer for the back breaking but simple work, perhaps a set of of masons tools as a re-usable component, etc. This spell re-creates a full structure, rather than creates a simple wall of stone that can be dispelled. It is quite powerful, and expensive components that make up for the wizard's own shortcomings and a 7th level tag is appropriate for it.

    One thing that must always be considered is that magic shouldn't be a money machine. It isn't a complete replacement for hard work and the expenditure of cash, only an enhancement. The more that magic does, the more powerful it is. Rather than having to spend tens of thousands of gold pieces for new materials and to hire a team of skilled and unskilled laborers to work for months to rebuild a ruined keep, fortified manor, small castle, whatever, you just go to the local wizard and have them do it for you in single day, and for what? 5% of the actual cost? That is what we call super-high magic. If you want to accomplish a lot then you have to pay for it. This spell not only has value in that you don't need to acquire new materials(you can't rebuild a structure out of pulverized/rotted materials, you need new materials) or wrangle a team of workers together, let alone pay for them, but the pittance of time it takes for the magic to complete its job is also of great value. Thus, the spell is very powerful.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -


    Last edited by Cebrion on Fri Oct 16, 2009 10:32 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jan 05, 2002
    Posts: 948
    From: Sky Island, So Cal

    Send private message
    Fri Oct 16, 2009 8:28 pm  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    If the spell restores the stone, why does the stone need to "wear away" at more than a normal rate?


    Basic play balance. If the changes are allowed to be permanent, the spell becomes much more powerful than any other 7th level spell.

    So if you want permanent changes, then you should drastically reduce the area of effect (as is done in glassteel).

    And yes, glassteel is giving "new" properties to the glass.

    But taking a collapsed building with broken stone, eroded mortar, and rotted wood and "restoring" it to its original state strikes me as nearly equal in power.
    _________________
    My campaigns are multilayered tapestries upon which I texture themes and subject matter which, quite frankly, would simply be too strong for your hobbyist gamer.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mp7Ikko8SI
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 17, 2009 5:14 am  

    I do appreciate all that's being said, however, there are two things here that seem contradictory to me:

    First, I refuse to believe that it requires a more powerful spell to restore stone to its original condition, then it takes to actually create a Wall of Stone out of nothingness, despite the fact that its effect is temporary.

    Second, Glassteel changes the very nature of the glass. JHSII's spell does not in any way change the nature of the stone. The broken stone, or even the dust, was stone and/or masonry. But the glass was never steel, nor even remotely related to steel.

    So, JHSII's spell only tells the stone to "be itself." But the "Wall of Stone" spell tells "the air" to be something else and the "Glassteel" spell tells glass to be something else. Both of these border on being "creative" powers, whereas JHSII"s spell is simply a "restorative" power.

    I believe that it takes a more powerful spell to tell something to "change its nature" then it does to simply restore something to its former self.

    And more than anything else in this world, stone and concrete are permanent. Restoring them to their former "selves" is all the "permanency" it takes, there is no "extra" magic needed.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sat Oct 17, 2009 6:20 am  

    JHSII I wasn't disagreeing with your reasoning, just explaining why I might do it a little differently. And I agree with most everything you just said.

    Stopping a 14th level magician from killing the "King" would be hard to do, especially if the magician were hell bent on doing it. The "King" knows this and that's why I say that the King, Duke or Baron forcing magicians to do this would be extremely rare. Last I "heard" neither Otto nor Jallarzi were as powerful as Mordenkainen, yet no one attempts to "force" them to do anything.

    I admit that lowering the spell level in my "world" -- as I stated -- would lower the necessary level of the spell's caster as well, still most adventuring groups are "too powerful" to mess with for something that simple. The ruler isn't interested in "losing" that many men in an effort to save some money. So I just don't see that sort of thing happening "on a daily basis," as it were.

    And you are correct. Clerical "healing" is nothing more than prayer. There's absolutely no reason that it cannot be done for free. No God/Goddess benefits from money; his/her earthly subjects do, but the God/Goddess does not. So why even charge a fee? Simply for the money.

    Why sit around in your "magic shop" all day making potions? Because you're going to sell them for money! So there will be magicians willing to do this "for the money."

    For the King? He gets his castle in "one month" as opposed to "one year." Many rulers will pay for this type of service, including the providing of assistance in acquiring the spell's components. And there will be magicians willing to sell this service.

    But most rulers are no different than our nations of today, paying "over time" is much easier/cheaper than paying "all at once." They can afford to pay laborers a salary to "work" for a couple of years (especially "free labor" indentured servants) much more easily than they can pay to have the necessary number of these spells cast.

    So this spell isn't going to do away with the labor force anytime soon.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:20 am  

    So wall of stone is not the best of comparisons as it doesn't do something similar to this spell, but stone shape is very similar in its effect and so is a better comparison.

    stone shape(3rd level druid spell): area of effect- 3 cubic feet, plus 1 cubic foot per level.

    stone shape(5th level magic-user spell): stone shape: area of effect- 1 cubic foot per level.

    JHSII's spell(7th level magic-user spell): area of effect- *1,000 cubic feet per level*; re-builds buildings/structures made from stone, wood, metal, etc.

    I'm thinking that the 1,000 times the area of effect part(and that it affects all types of building materials) is worth four more levels than the druid version of stone shape, and two more levels than the magic-user version of stone shape. Wink

    For the material components I'd put "see below" and then include something like the following:

    "The material components of the spell are a miniature set of masons tools made of gold(worth 500 g.p.), a small stone and piece of wood that have been broken and made whole with a mending spell, and any materials needed to rebuild the structure that are no longer present. For example, restoring a wooden building that partially burnt down would require replacement wood for the burnt portions, or if stone from a destroyed keep had been taken and used to build other buildings, an equal amount of replacement stone would need to be provided. The miniature set of mason's tools are not consumed in the casting of the spell and may be reused."
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 18, 2009 4:56 am  

    Cebrion, I like those spell components. That sounds much more realistic. Good job with that. Cool

    Yes, Stone Shape is a much better comparison (I regret I don't have the publications to do these comparisons myself). Sad

    Given that Stone Shape is only one cubic foot per level and JHSII's spell allows for 1000 cubic feet per level, then I will have to agree with the 7th Level ranking of his spell. Are you a defense attorney by any chance, Cebrion? Laughing Laughing

    A little off topic, but related, isn't there a spell that calls for a certain number of "hands" to work on behalf of the spell caster? I seem to recall some such, but may be mistaken. Confused
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 18, 2009 5:49 am  

    Laughing

    Yes, the 10' cube(1,000 cubic feet) doesn't sound like much until you compare it to the amount of area that other spells affect. As to the components, that is what I'd call a rough draft. I'm still of the opinion that there should be a stiff monetary cost added to the spell(more on that later). Casting a spell of this power shouldn't be too cheap, and the 500 g.p. tool set is very cheap. I just settled on that as an initial idea. More research and thought is required.

    Having been a DM for my most recent years of gaming, and knowing how many ruined keeps, castles and other ruined buildings my PCs have come across, a spell like this would have seen them all owning a keep, castle, or other structure. Maure Castle, the T1 Moathouse(which they did pay to rebuild, which took some time and included its own fun experiences), and a sizable keep in the Mistmarsh are just a few examples. There are 3 characters capable of casting this spell in my campaign, one of whom is an invoker who specializes in warfare and battle magic. And, yes, he took the Engineering non-weapon proficiency/skill(among other things) so that he would know how to build siege engines and where structures' weak points are. Cool He'd go nuts with this spell. With a spell like this it would be too easy not to have ruined places, regardless of age, rebuilt. Of course there is the fact of upkeep costs and staffing of such places, but the places can still be returned to working condition in the first place. Somebody will staff them.

    The Greyhawk mages guild would take a weekend and rebuild the burnt out area of the city, and so it wouldn't be there. There would be no reason for it to be. Almor would rise again and become a fully fortified dark reflection of its former self in a matter of days if the spell were to be used by Xavener and the mages serving him. Admundfort would not have remained in ruins, and would have become a fully functioning stronghold of Iuz, or it never would have fallen in the first place, as Shield Lander mages would just continually repair all of the damage done to the fortifications every day.

    Without a significant cost to be paid, this spell reeks of high magic, so it should be counterbalanced in a major way. Basic materials is one way, but if the materials are all present, just busted up, the cost is paltry. That needs to be addressed with a very expensive material component that is not dependent of the basic building materials being present. Otherwise the potential for abuse is huge. And who would abuse it? The players of course. You know they would. Wink Laughing
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -


    Last edited by Cebrion on Mon Oct 19, 2009 12:59 am; edited 2 times in total
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 18, 2009 9:46 am  

    All very true. Wink

    Perhaps the blood of a Red Dragon of a certain age group (100+ ?) could be required before the masonry which binds the stones together would be reconstituted? Or something along those lines anyway. Evil Grin

    Now that's a component that's not going to be easy to come by.

    You're a far more experienced DM than I can claim to be, Cebrion. Toss that idea around a bit and let me know what you think. Wink
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Master Greytalker

    Joined: Jun 25, 2007
    Posts: 951
    From: Neck Deep in the Viscounty of Verbobonc

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:17 pm  

    I recommend harvesting the blood of mystic sages who pick on helpless, innocent halflings. It's easy to come by, and it tastes great! Cool
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:33 pm  

    The most powerful thing about this spell is the time and labor it saves. As to the cost, that shouldn't be off-set too much over what it would normally cost to build the structure in the first place. You might say that material and special components costs required are 50% of the total normal cost for any structure, as the spell takes care of the labor aspect of the rebuilding. The costs of structural components varies(DMG 1e p. 107). Here's the approximate building times for some stuctures(DMG 1e, p.106):

    Moat house, shell keep, small castle- 1 year + 2-8 months

    Small castle with outer and inner walls, medium castle- 2 years + 1-6 months

    Medium castle with outer and inner walls, large castle- 3 years + 2-0 months

    Large concentric castle, walling average town- 5 years + 1-12 months


    Rebuilding ruined structures dozens of times faster than building them new is a very powerful effect. No problems there. I can picture in my mind the mage overseeing the "mending" and rebuilding of the structure as if it was going in reverse from a crumbled state to a whole state- stone bits collecting together and mending into intact stones, fractured support beams mending together with the cracking sound of splintering wood, and everything slowly shifting back into its original positions.

    I think the only things that really need to be nailed down are the cost factor and exactly how much time is saved through using the spell. I think that this is a spell that a mage will be spending the whole day using. Perhaps each casting of the spell lasts for eight hours, and that the power of the mage determines what can be accomplished in that eight hours; that being rebuilding one 10" cube(1,000 cubic feet) per level of the caster. A large structure might take a week or two to rebuild at this rate, but that is a pittance of time when one considers that it takes a work crew one week to build one 10' cube of a stone structure, half that if your pay 150% of the cost, and 1/3 that amount of time if you pay 250% of the cost(the extra cost represents hiring more workers to complete the job faster).

    Those are all of the factors I think.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    GreySage

    Joined: Oct 06, 2008
    Posts: 2788
    From: South-Central Pennsylvania

    Send private message
    Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:57 pm  

    Consider too that a King, or a Duke, might employ two magicians on such a project. Confused

    Time could be halved further still, but at what costs? All in all, I don't think too many people are going to be able to employ such magics.
    _________________
    Mystic's web page: http://melkot.com/mysticscholar/index.html
    Mystic's blog page: http://mysticscholar.blogspot.com/
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Jul 03, 2009
    Posts: 74
    From: The Horned Society

    Send private message
    Mon Oct 19, 2009 12:14 am  

    Lord_Percard wrote:
    That is kinda what I was getting at with the "dust". If a building falls out of use and falls into disrepair, it is common for the locals to "pilfer" building materials. It was a common occurance in Europe after the fall of the Roman Empire. So does the spell "create" the new building materials? I am not against the spell or it's use. I actually find it very intriguing and would like to see a variation such as Create ....(tower/keep). But if I were to allow it in my game I think that I would add a time component, such as the older the building the higher the level the caster has to be or perhaps based on when the damage was done. Just thought I would add another perspective. Happy


    There are plenty of wall creation type of spells out there,that really don't require a foundation or stucture to originally be in place.Maybe they should turn CF into a construction forum....
    Apprentice Greytalker

    Joined: Nov 03, 2008
    Posts: 80
    From: NW Indiana

    Send private message
    Mon Oct 19, 2009 5:22 am  

    Acid Arrow - I agree that there are other spells that create wall types but as Cebrion pointed out those walls can be dispelled. The foundation would be required as one of the spell components for the spell to restore the ruined structure. Otherwise the spell would be called Create "Structure".

    Like Cebrion and I pointed out, players would be running around finding thousands of year old ruins and within a relatively short period of time, recreating temples, castles, keeps, cities... (Cities maybe a little out there but I have had players come up with crazier ideas in the past) That is why I wanted to insert a time component.

    But to get back to the original spell, the idea was to restore or mend a partially destroyed structure. Thus the argument for age would only be a minor issue. For the longer the structure sits the more likely it is for items to go missing. Simply put, if the players come across a ruined structure and wish to caste the spell a roadblock would be that too much of the orginal structure is missing and thus the spell will not work.
    Black Hand of Oblivion

    Joined: Feb 16, 2003
    Posts: 3821
    From: So. Cal

    Send private message
    Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:18 am  

    Mystic-Scholar wrote:
    All in all, I don't think too many people are going to be able to employ such magics.


    Exactly. Wink

    For truly massive structures the cost should be exorbitant.

    However, the spell still can be used on much simpler structures too. That 1,000 cubic feet translates to five 10' x 10' structural sections that are 2' thick, and at the minimum caster level(14th) seventy of those sections could be rebuilt in an 8 hour period. A fortified manner could be rebuilt in less than a week. An inn or tavern, likely having 1' thick exterior walls and half that for interior walls and floors(which would include every support beam in the place too, as floors surely aren't 6" thick), could be rebuilt in but a day or two. A simple home could be rebuilt in a matter or hours, and at half the cost it would not be expensive(by an adventurer's or noble's standards) to do so.

    This would be an interesting variant on the construction spell. It is one level higher and is limited to only rebuilding previously intact structures, but the reconstruction takes place much more quickly- 1,000 cubic feet per level, per day, as opposed to 1,000 cubic feet per day.
    _________________
    - Moderator/Admin (in some areas)/Member -
    Display posts from previous:   
       Canonfire Forum Index -> Greyhawk- AD&D 1st Edition All times are GMT - 8 Hours
    Page 1 of 1

    Jump to:  

    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum




    Canonfire! is a production of the Thursday Group in assocation with GREYtalk and Canonfire! Enterprises

    Contact the Webmaster.  Long Live Spidasa!


    Greyhawk Gothic Font by Darlene Pekul is used under the Creative Commons License.

    PHP-Nuke Copyright © 2005 by Francisco Burzi. This is free software, and you may redistribute it under the GPL. PHP-Nuke comes with absolutely no warranty, for details, see the license.
    Page Generation: 0.33 Seconds