Do you have custom spells you could share? I never correctly balance any of my homebrew and it leads to Party-Wipes or the players stomping all my encounters!
Reminds me of 4e spell attacks instead of saves. I also like that you could use hero points to reroll spells. The current version would still be a slight buff of +1 to accuracy which could shake some things up. I like it, might use it in one of my games.
It's actually exactly the same numbers wise, that's why it's DC -11 instead of DC -10! But yes, it was inspired by 4e, and I think it's awesome! I hope it makes your games more fun if you end up using it.
Huh, I don't know how I missed that, mathing it all out again. I guess they need to be at a -2 to have matching accuracy. Thanks for catching that. I'll update my automation and description.
thats pretty interesting... question tho. how is it done when targeting multiple enemies in an aoe? roll for each?
Yes! You'd roll for each individually, since they'd each get their own save normally.
I wish Paizo had gone this route with the Remaster entirely, far superior, thank you for this and the support foundry mod.
Do you have custom spells you could share? I never correctly balance any of my homebrew and it leads to Party-Wipes or the players stomping all my encounters!
Absolutely! I'll look into putting a video together talking about homebrewing spells + toss in some examples from my own work.
Reminds me of 4e spell attacks instead of saves. I also like that you could use hero points to reroll spells. The current version would still be a slight buff of +1 to accuracy which could shake some things up. I like it, might use it in one of my games.
It's actually exactly the same numbers wise, that's why it's DC -11 instead of DC -10! But yes, it was inspired by 4e, and I think it's awesome! I hope it makes your games more fun if you end up using it.
if you look at your example the scout fails the save on a 1,2,3,4,5 (25% chance), with spell checks you hit him on a 15,16,17,18,19,20 (30% chance)
Huh, I don't know how I missed that, mathing it all out again. I guess they need to be at a -2 to have matching accuracy. Thanks for catching that. I'll update my automation and description.