Zone of Revelation reveals too much?

[Sonja BloodRayne]

Ok..so since I'm one of those over powered clerics as some would say, but I'm not going to get snarky about that since that thread has been closed...here is my 2 cents on ZOR.

That is a spell I have never used nor will I ever use. My clerics spot is horrible so I can't see a damn thing. And she doesn't really care if she does happen to spot something. I couldn't give a rats ass if you got rid of the spell.

[DM_Acorn]

I hear your frustration Loller, I will tell you that anyone who rest and rebuffs in one of my events, with out RPing the 8 hours it takes to rest, will get slapped. I wish more people would try to offer your level of RP etiquette.

Fact: It takes 8 hours to rest, and spells per day means exactly that, not new spells every 10 min.

-If you are interacting with a DM.
-If someone has set you to hostile.
-If there are other PCs (not in your party) in your zone/area.

-Then you are EXPECTED to hold to the 8 hour rules.

It is not okay to pop off a rest while in conversation, while the DM is trying to help you tell a story, or when others might want to take actions to interrupt you.

It is not about WINNING people! It is about telling good stories.

I wonder if it is possible to have a UI like grapple to interrupt rest. If a cleric rests and the rogue is there, the rogue could wait for the rest then tap the interrupt button. They would be without buffs and would not have the new daily allotment...

This would keep the rest times low and allow the rogues proper RP opportunity.

I realize this may seem off topic, but I happen to think this is a far better solution when compared to the changing of individual spells. We could do that every day and still never balance things.

[Machiavelli]

I'd propose perhaps the following as compromise:
1. Short duration: 1 Rd/2 levels or something to that effect.
--- Would make it reactionary rather than preventative.

This.

[Kaeldorn]

I'd prefer increasing the casting time so that it can only be used as a preventative measure, and not as a reactive one.

[roguethree]

I'd rather it be reactive. As it is, some enterprising divine caster can make a zone completely unstealthable for a very long time. Reducing the duration makes the spell situational. Otherwise, some enterprising cleric could drop a zone over, say, a known Banite portal location, then sit and wait.

Garbage? Yes. Will people do it? Yes, just like they use transitions as an excuse to suddenly be stealthed again. Even reducing the duration to 1 round/level will keep people from just tossing it around.

[Anks]

I dont think this should remove etherealness as Cornuto proposes, I think its removal of etherealness makes this a decent counter to it, afterall in pnp it does say it makes them visible does it not? And in pnp when ethereal creatures are revealed they can be attacked but solely by magical weapons and with a 50% miss chance. (Is problably thinkng of something else but will problably look into it solely for the purpose of countering all those people who spam ethereal jaunt when their attacked but poof away to buff and heal. -which is lame! )

[Kaizen]

yes, just like they use transitions as an excuse to suddenly be stealthed again.

qf(mf)t

I dont think this should remove etherealness as Cornuto proposes, I think its removal of etherealness makes this a decent counter to it, afterall in pnp it does say it makes them visible does it not? And in pnp when ethereal creatures are revealed they can be attacked but solely by magical weapons and with a 50% miss chance. (Is problably thinkng of something else but will problably look into it solely for the purpose of countering all those people who spam ethereal jaunt when their attacked but poof away to buff and heal. -which is lame! )

Agreed, Etheral is so bugged on this server (other etheral can't attack them, force spells don't hurt them, they can't fly, can't move at reduced speed, can't melt through walls, can summon etc etc) that's it practically an 'immunity' button that has absolutely no counter. I'm not sure how I feel about the stealth/ZoR mechanics, but having at least one option on the server (even if it's a Cleric/FS/Sorc/Wiz spell) for Etheralness would be nice.

[Talleyman99]

So, read though all the posts... Just drop it down to 1 round per level problem solved. Use the K.I.S.S method people.

[Dark Omen]

So, read though all the posts... Just drop it down to 1 round per level problem solved. Use the K.I.S.S method people.

I like the way you think, sir

[Kaeldorn]

The spell is meant to be employed as a ward to make sure there are no undesired guests in important meetings and such. 1 round/level would destroy that purpose and essentially make it an invisibility purge that works against more effects than just invisibility.

[Dragor]

If it actually is becoming a problem put a price tag on it

[The Butcher]

I am happy with it being 1 round per 2, or even maybe 3 caster levels. This makes it a reactionary spell that will keep rogues from HiPSing away immediately, but also where a cleric/favored soul can not chain extend them (for 48 rounds at 1 round per caster level; 4 min and 48 seconds) to ensure no stealthers enter the area while resting when depleted.

I also do not think people realize that this spell is being cast on transitions, where players can not avoid it on loading in, or at the crossroad's portal location so the Black Hand can not discreetly enter Sundren. It makes RP sense that players would be wary around the crossroads given its infamy, but bottlenecking transition points that can't be avoided OOCly, when they clearly can be ICly, is metagaming.

[Cornuto]

The spell is meant to be employed as a ward to make sure there are no undesired guests in important meetings and such. 1 round/level would destroy that purpose and essentially make it an invisibility purge that works against more effects than just invisibility.

This spell already exists: alarm.

[Kaeldorn]

Alarm only tells there is something there. Anything that passes through the area would make the alarm go off and it doesn't reveal anything that's (magically) hidden.

Zone of revelation actually reveals creatures hidden from the naked eye and doesn't produce 'false alarm', making it ideal to use in combination with stationed guards that can respond immediately if an intruder enters the zone.

It should be pretty obvious that it's not the same thing.

[Lollercide]

The spell is meant to be employed as a ward to make sure there are no undesired guests in important meetings and such.

This spell already exists: alarm.

Alarm only tells there is something there.

Seems like a misunderstanding of semantics. I think Kaeldorn meant to say a spell that reveals and removes undesired guests, not checks if there are undesired guests in important meetings.