Getting back on topic, I have read the entire thread to this point and have come to several conclusions. I know that the intention of the spell is to simulate the effect of a unit removed from combat. However, the spell only approximates this effect and doesn't actually do it. This can lead to a number of unintended circumstances.
If you would like an example then I refer you to a
post I made weeks ago where paralyze (cast by my own mages) caused me to lose a battle I had technically won. I also can supply additional instances where paralyze has caused a great deal of wackyness because the unit is "removed" but still present. The intention of the spell should not override adjustments to that spell as fairness and balance is much more important.
That said I don't particularly find the spell overpowered. It is only overpowering if you equate paralysis with death, which the original poster has done. Paralysis is not death in the same way that paralysis is not actually removal from combat.
I must admit that I was attracted to NTJedi's idea that some factor should allow you to shrug off some of the effect. Though MR is the most logical choice, it also gives high MR units double the protection by raising only one stat.
Personally, I might be more in favor of a few magical items (existing or new) that can shave the time off paralysis for the super combatant. In my mind, this allows for more rock-paper-scissor action as you can now make a SC nearly immune to paralysis spam and yet less effective against other attacks. I'm in favor of SCs becoming more specialized so that they aren't all the same cookie cutter thugs. This I think appeals to the SC crowd and yet keeps the mage and army crowds happy because they still have options against such beastly beings.
Re: Paralysis is overpowered.
Hybrid Mode
