User talk:Luigifan18/Aetheric Weapon (3.5e Spell)

Ratings

	Catgirldreamer3100 opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	My group has tested this out; overall we rate it the same - a very bad idea, one which can overpower any campaign it's let loose upon.

Wildmage opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

Badly done in my openion. Firstly what been said by the others still apply! Secondly the price to make a permanent epic +5 flaming frosen holy quickend wounding screaming dancing singing killer dart is all to cheap and easy (before you say its op the God... why would the god of tyrany stop his servant getting this or the murder god stop his follower or why would the paladin god of light stop his devoted priest of light) The whole DM fiat put on with fluff cover stinks! If you should improve this then make a list of weapons were if you worshipped the sun god of partying you got his epic +5 dancing flaming whip and so on were you made a list of weapons for a list of gods then people could see the powerlevel you were going for and make lists for their own gods. And players would not risk 2000 xp in a DM fiat gamble that if it works would grand them a extremly powerfull weapon

	Leziad opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	It not just awful, it god awful. EDIT: Still awful. The line of tags is longer than some feats we have on the wiki.

Spanambula opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

FIRST OF ALL, try notifying users that you're blocking their ratings as per the community guidelines requirements. This spell has not significantly changed, and I would LOVE to hear your explanation as to what is so radically different about this new and improved version that it justifies blocking everyone's unaddressed criticisms. SECOND, In case my previous rating was not sufficiently clear, I will elaborate, taking into account the current revision. Say it with me now: Spells that rely completely on DM fiat ARE BAD DESIGN. Period full stop the end. If you're designing a spell that costs you 2k XP minimum to ask your deity politely for a weapon, why not save yourself 1,000 XP by casting Gate and ask your deity for a loaner, since that also would be completely up to the DM to grant on whatever basis the DM chooses. Your spell is just begging to cause a heated argument at the table or discord server. Then there's the usual and completely unnecessary "Luigifansplaining" of both basic game mechanics and your own fluff. You call the created weapon a replica in the first line, there's no need to add "you're not leaving god unarmed, LOLWINK" later on. Also, how is this a creation AND calling spell? The two subschools are mutually exclusive. And the XP cost calculation is still ridiculous. Why mess with "1/4 of the inner diameter of your left asscheek times 3.75 the weight of your last turd in kilograms divided by yesterday's bedtime in Greenwich Time"? You already specified 20k gold's worth of enhancements = +1 for the purposes of casting time, just use that for XP as well. Not that this still isn't ridiculous. I mean, you're looking at 14,625 XP to make a permanent +10 weapon, which would only cost 8,000 XP to make yourself, without any item creation feats. Bottom line, this thing is still a hot mess, I still oppose it, and don't block my rating again without actually, substantially fixing things. Actually no. Fix it, then ask to change the rating. If the fix is not unreasonable, the Rater will not refuse. I got tired just reading all the spell descriptors. Then I actually read the spell. Here is my verbatim reaction as I read it: "What. wha.... WHAT. Whaaaat. No. No. Noooope. Oh, look, there's the needlessly complicated formula. Wait WHAT? Why would... oh JE-zus.. Arrrgh, no."

Eiji-kun opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

Oh dear. This has the usual earmarks of a bad Luigifan article: A simple a workable concept rendered until 40 pages of text, interspersed with random commentary within rules text that is too complex for the purpose. Look, the spell is: You summon a weapon. It has a +5 enhancement bonus and +5 special abilities (or 20,000 gp in enhancements per +1, which mind you is nowhere near making sense). You can bypass DR/epic, though I don't know why you don't just offer a +6 weapon then. And if you spend XP, it can be permanent. That's it. It's creation, yet also calling which are two very separate thing. It is every descriptor in the universe. I'm pretty sure I saw the Bot, Native, and Potato descriptors somewhere in there. You don't need that. The fluff says "An enemy, I need a weapon!" What it doesn't say is "and then I stand there five rounds as I am carved into kibble waiting for a sword I could afford 4 levels ago". It doesn't give proficiency, so enjoy your almighty spear, spellcaster. It limits you to non-epic weapons but you bypass DR/epic anyway. Also god can ignore you, because "can I haz sword" might be unreasonable somehow, and if you're almost as strong as the god he might be more willing. Personally I'd like to imagine it's because you're a level 28 cleric. YOU ARE A GOD at that point. Oh, and you're spending enough XP to power a Wish spell. For the love of god just wish yourself some pimp ass weapons or hell, buy one. You're level 17+, you can afford it. Just... why? Ancestral Weapon. 1st level. Did it better. EDIT: On re-looking at this spell... I'm not really sure what changed in order to make this an old review. It's still a pile of tags doing a job of a 1st level spell badly. So... it's back.

Aetheric weapon doesn't have every descriptor at once; it can potentially have any descriptor. It all depends on the properties of the weapon you're requesting. --Luigifan18 (talk) 22:13, 7 December 2017 (MST)

I'm well aware it's not every descriptor at once. My point is that this is cluttered because its slapped on every descriptor possible ever. It really doesn't need it either; these kinds of descriptors are usually reserved for something that its purely an elemental something (for your various energy types), or something directly channeling the power of an alignment thing like summoning an angel. Somehow I think a Holy Longsword is not really on par with conjuring Metatron. And don't get me started on mind-affecting, which comes with the implication that the sword you conjure is just an illusion in your head, that is if it ever triggered because it's not even clear when such a thing would apply.

Personally I wouldn't have descriptors here since it's just "summon weapon" as its main effect, and just a chunk of steel with some fire on it rather than a shard of raw flame itself. Not having the descriptor doesn't disallow its effects from dealing the appropriate damage type, it's more of a tag for interactions with various feats, immunities, and abilities. Case in point: Polymorph could turn you into a Red Dragon, yet it lacks the Fire descriptor because the purpose of the spell is "Turn thing into other thing". Being able to be a firebreathing beast is incidental. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 01:41, 8 December 2017 (MST)

Trivia

I should point out that this spell has nothing to do with aetherion (though, as soon as someone comes up with an aetherion weapon property, it'll be able to use aetherion if the caster so desires). The name of this spell stems from the "aetheric sciences" of Gunnerkrigg Court, a webcomic by Tom Sidell. Basically, the "aetheric sciences" is the in-universe term for magical phenomena, up to and including gods (such as Coyote). Recent events have revealed that the aether is composed of human imagination. I felt the name was appropriate for a spell that basically creates a weapon out of nothing simply by invoking the power of your god. --Luigifan18 (talk) 00:39, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Coming back to it, I found something funny

Besides still being a bad spell, I saw this: "As always, you cannot add incompatible properties (such as axiomatic and anarchic) to the same weapon."

Just so people know, this is absolutely untrue. You can totally have an Axiomatic Anarchic weapon. Dunno why you'd want to, but they don't stop each other. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 10:40, 7 December 2019 (UTC)