| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4457 Posts |
 Posted - 17 May 2012 : 21:24:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Well, now, I think this discussion does circumlocutively work its way back to class balance. If a wizard type basically accumulates one damage die every level or two - which bypasses armor and affects an area! - then it's probably only fair to have the fighter type be able to whollop many dice per round out as well.
Agreed. And even as we're discussing the lacking quality of damage dealing spells of earlier editions, something should be said for the ability to spread that damage around a multitude of foes in an area. A Wizard's fireball spell might only deal initially 5d6 (avg. 17-20 damage) but that was in a 20 ft. burst in 1 turn. A fighter could never hope to inflict that sort of damage amongst that many targets in two turns, let alone one.
I also feel that the Wizard's great strength wasn't in Damage dealing spells or even the ability to end a BBEG with 1 Save-or-Die spell, it was it's ability to be so versatile. But in v3.5 that versatility took on new meanings (practically replacing classes all together) but it looks like in D&D:Next, that versatility will be tempered with limitations via Spell Slots. The idea that scrolls increase a Wizard's versatility for any given situaion at the cost of spell slots is an amazing idea that keeps the flavor of being Problem Solver without overpowering what the wizard can dish out ove the course of a single day. |
 |
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3807 Posts |
Posted - 17 May 2012 : 21:56:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Well, now, I think this discussion does circumlocutively work its way back to class balance. If a wizard type basically accumulates one damage die every level or two - which bypasses armor and affects an area! - then it's probably only fair to have the fighter type be able to whollop many dice per round out as well.
Agreed. And even as we're discussing the lacking quality of damage dealing spells of earlier editions, something should be said for the ability to spread that damage around a multitude of foes in an area. A Wizard's fireball spell might only deal initially 5d6 (avg. 17-20 damage) but that was in a 20 ft. burst in 1 turn. A fighter could never hope to inflict that sort of damage amongst that many targets in two turns, let alone one.
This is highly balanced by saving throws and energy resistance, in a way that a fireball cast at high levels will achieve little effects.
The DC for the saving throw can't change much, since the wizard's INT won't increase a lot, however creature's saving throws will rise to a point where they'll pass the save most of the times.
Couple halved damage with resistance and an average fireball will only cook your enemies' lunch. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 17 May 2012 21:58:20 |
|
|
|
Erik Scott de Bie
Forgotten Realms Author
USA
4598 Posts |
Posted - 17 May 2012 : 22:43:28
|
Also keep in mind we don't know how hit points are going to work. Pcs might not get lots of hit points in 5e, so the mathematical balance wouldn't work quite the same way as in earlier editions.
The goal here is to make magic increase in effectiveness without making the wizard just amazingly more potent than the fighter after a certain point. Keeping low level spells static in power level (though if you particularly want to use one you can by using a higher level slot) would seem an option.
On the metamagic thing, I should clarify: this system follows the SPIRIT of metamagic, and provides plenty of design opportunities to incorporate metamagic going forward.
Cheers |
Erik Scott de Bie
'Tis easier to destroy than to create.
Author of a number of Realms novels (GHOSTWALKER, DEPTHS OF MADNESS, and the SHADOWBANE series), contributor to the NEVERWINTER CAMPAIGN GUIDE and SHADOWFELL: GLOOMWROUGHT AND BEYOND, Twitch DM of the Dungeon Scrawlers, currently playing "The Westgate Irregulars" |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4457 Posts |
Posted - 17 May 2012 : 23:08:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Yes, maybe I shouldn't have said ''doesn't implement metamagic AT ALL'' but, reading the article, I had the impression that they only wanted to include the damage increasing effect with the spell-slot scaling system. If they include a possibility to add other effects to spells by increasing their slot, like you suggested, then I'll be fine.
I think it's important to mention this on the Open Playtest. Sure, we're only going to see a very small window into the actual product but I have a feeling people will take off with the Playtest and then start developing their own "mini-games", probably up until the next open playtest or until the launch. And of course, suggestions such as incorporating additional effects within each Spell would be a great suggestion from the get-go.
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
However, taking your example, a 4d6+4 magic missile is worth a swift action at level 13 but I'm not sure it'll be worth to consume a powerful 7th level slot just to have the chance to inflict that meager damage, which will be only a scratch again if they keep the same amount of hp creatures had in 3.5ed. So, the problem with damage spells will persist.
The true power of the Magic Missile isn't necessarily the damage it causes but the lack of any requirement from either the Caster OR the defender. It's just straight up damage with ne'er a chance to escape (besides SR, which I don't think is coming back). Automatic 20-ish damage for a Minor action with no questions ask is pretty potent, even if the monster has 200 HP. Also, I don't think HPs are going to scale to the ridiculous levels we started to see with 3E and got excaserbated with 4th Edition. If I remember correctly, much of the numbers side of the game are going to remain pretty simple and not inflate to epic proportions. It's my hope to NEVER see a monster with more than 300 HP again. And if I do, it had better be pretty damn epic in level and scope within the setting (or produced to fight a 4 PCs all by itself).
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Anyway, one thing I'd like to see again is the possibility of modifying spells by adding effects they normally wouldn't have (like invisible, entangling, sculpted... spell). As I said, they can add flavorful and funny effect to spells that would otherwise be basically the same (fireball and cone of cold, for example).
I totally agree with this. Hopefully this will be the aspect we'll see with some Feats, talents, traits, whatever that helps modify the standard. But I hope there aren't requirements for making flavor a part of the mechanics. If I want to make my Magic Missles look like small, black flying skulls that trail shadow I shouldn't have to use character resources just for flavor. Now, if it was to increase damage, change it to negative energy, or give me a bonus to something then yes, a requirement for those changes to the spell are needed. But flavor should remain something individual and divorced from the rules.
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
This is highly balanced by saving throws and energy resistance, in a way that a fireball cast at high levels will achieve little effects.
The DC for the saving throw can't change much, since the wizard's INT won't increase a lot, however creature's saving throws will rise to a point where they'll pass the save most of the times.
Couple halved damage with resistance and an average fireball will only cook your enemies' lunch.
One thing I hope stays gone are Saving Throw in the form that we say with 3E and previous. The differences that I saw with targeting in 3E to 4E were pretty diverse but I think 4E's approach was simpler. By making the attacker roll, it speeds up the game as you have 1 modifier normally effecting every target. With multiple defenders rolling saves, I felt it slowed the game down because the DM now has to track what saves go to which target and they're often different across the board.
So maybe the situation you mentioned won't be a problem. A successful attack hits the target for the full damage, a miss only deals half damage. IN the end, your still rolling for something but the job falls on the attack, like a Fighter swinging his sword. I can also see certain feats or magical gear allowing spellcaster to ignore creature's elemental resistances too.
Which makes me wonder how different the Sorcerer is going to be from the Wizard. With a potential for a Spell-Pool system, I'm hoping the Sorcerer has a LOT different mechanics and even some spells. Sorcerer's have been running with Bloodlines since Complete Arcane and has gone that route with Pathfinder and 4th Edition. So hopefully it'll be an aspect of Sorcerers for D&D:next too. |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2012 : 05:51:36
|
quote:
Erik Scott de Bie
Also keep in mind we don't know how hit points are going to work. Pcs might not get lots of hit points in 5e, so the mathematical balance wouldn't work quite the same way as in earlier editions.
I fully expect hit point inflation, epic-level PCs packing more hit points than 1E-era gods and avatars. A short article from Grognardia agrees with my personal observation/opinion of the matter ... without even going near the ridiculously high numbers seen in 3E and beyond. Seriously - when have we *ever* seen deflation in a new D&D product? Everything is always bigger, better, badder, more spectacular and fusion-powered and anime-hyperexaggerated than ever seen before. Always. Sure, 5E might come with some sort of "DM Control Panel" filled with sliders and settings configured to preference ... but realistically, it's going to be the crazy huge panzer-paladin guy, the chainmail bikini elf spellcaster, and the punky little drow emo with Yu-Gi-Oh hair and a pair of ridiculously huge 8-foot long "swords" - a cast straight out of a comic book - these are what will really sell the game, these are the characters many customers will want to play, as always.
It's not unreasonable to expect the damage output of spells and spellcasters to be scaled up as well, just to maintain parity with the manlier new-edition characters and mobs who can absorb it. I just hope it's not another D&D version where wizards dump massive handfuls of dice on the table while the fighters wade into the thick armed with nothing more than a d8/d12 (and a few respectable plusses, perhaps even a multiplier!) they can swing around a few times each turn. Interestingly, Vancian-style spell memorization usually dictates how often and when the entire party of PCs must rest, how far they can push each day ... leaving the fighters and thieves little to do other than poke and steal from each other in boredom.
Agreed, saving throws and resistances do come into play, as do various counterspells and magical defenses. Then again, so does armor - fighters do not hit every time, they do not always do full damage on every hit, and more often than not they have to get close to things which hit back. Sure, a wizard might be pathetically frail and easy to pimpslap, but that's hardly a consideration when he's nuking the opposition from orbit. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 18 May 2012 07:00:58 |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2012 : 07:47:01
|
(Warning. The following may be considered a rant. If you do not particular like these forms of postings, or suffer an allergic reaction to t them, then skipping this post is advised.)
I have nothing against spell casters, or the people that play them. I myself have played a warmage, and Archivist, a Psychic warrior, and an Artificer. There are however, a few issues that I found with the class, mostly with wizards and sorcerers and what I think could be done to help reactify the issue somewhat. Keep in mind I know little about 4E, and so if any of these things have been tried, please point them out.
First, DMs you don’t have to run your games around your casters. Mine didn’t and it meant that as a caster you couldn’t fling your spells with recless abandoned and hope to rest and replenish when you went low. I think it’s in your best interest to make sure the wizard is very much aware of this possibility and force him from tim to time of it’s reality.
That said, It think a number of valuable lessons could be taken from the artificer in as far as helping to balance the class (yes I am aware of how some players abuse this class and will deal with that latter).
First, devide up the spells make the simple utility ones easy and quick to deal with, but the powerful ones as lengthy as infusions. Things that you had to prepare somewhat in advance, and could only hold to use for so long. Could you prepare and cast the spell in a fight, maybe, but the fight might be over before you are ready, and preparing a spell in combat in this manner should be difficult.
This brings me to point number two, making concentrate matter. It’s not easy to concentrate when people are war shouting, screaming in pain, arrows are flying about, and swords are clashing. What’s more, if anyone engages you, then it should be really hard to hold that last thread of your spell and not have to start over from scratch.
I believe someone described this as ritual magic, which is a guide descriptor for what I am talking about. Indeed some of these spells should even cost experience points as suggested by others previously. A concern, mentioned by still others, is that experience used in spell casting would stunt character growth. I respond with not necessarily, once again using the artificer as an example. The artificer at certain levels got a small pool of Exp to use in crafting, called the craft reserve, points were gained each time he leveled. Points could also be obtained by stripping magical parts from magic items. I see no reason why a similar system couldn’t be put in place for wizards for the casting of ritual magic.
I do think that spell circles might be a good thing to implement, once a caster has obtained a certain level of understanding they have acces to other spells, but only once a certain understanding is reached. This level of understanding is reflected in how they document their spells in their spell book perhaps, ink used, etc. In the case of sorcerers it could be a better understanding of their heratig and how they draw upon magic. That form may not necessarily be draconic in character, although that seems most obvious for the moment.
This ends my initial thoughts on the matter, but will hardly be my last post on the topic.
|
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2012 : 14:07:03
|
| If going by Mr.Bie earlier explanation of the use of spell slots for spells, would not that make the spells memorized by a wizard a bit crowded. If Mr.Mearls is to be believed he wants to reduce the number of spell slots and if i remember correctly, the spell slots in 3e/3.5e was not exactly a lot. There is going to be a bit more than grumbling here and if this "DnD Next" flops, then what is going to happen?DND 6e? |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4457 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2012 : 15:00:09
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
If going by Mr.Bie earlier explanation of the use of spell slots for spells, would not that make the spells memorized by a wizard a bit crowded. If Mr.Mearls is to be believed he wants to reduce the number of spell slots and if i remember correctly, the spell slots in 3e/3.5e was not exactly a lot. There is going to be a bit more than grumbling here and if this "DnD Next" flops, then what is going to happen?DND 6e?
For some comparison, a 3E wizard @ 10th level with an Intelligence score of 20 has 22 spell slots from 1st thru 5th level. That's quite a bit nor does this include cantrips OR magic items like wands, scrolls, staffs, or rods. So if you reduce this total by a small margin but still give them at-will spells that are useful throughout their career, it sort of mitigates power inflation and spell-less wizards.
If DnD:next fails, Hasbro will shelf the lable rather than than selling it, which is a actually a smart move. |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2012 : 15:18:46
|
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
If going by Mr.Bie earlier explanation of the use of spell slots for spells, would not that make the spells memorized by a wizard a bit crowded. If Mr.Mearls is to be believed he wants to reduce the number of spell slots and if i remember correctly, the spell slots in 3e/3.5e was not exactly a lot. There is going to be a bit more than grumbling here and if this "DnD Next" flops, then what is going to happen?DND 6e?
For some comparison, a 3E wizard @ 10th level with an Intelligence score of 20 has 22 spell slots from 1st thru 5th level. That's quite a bit nor does this include cantrips OR magic items like wands, scrolls, staffs, or rods. So if you reduce this total by a small margin but still give them at-will spells that are useful throughout their career, it sort of mitigates power inflation and spell-less wizards.
If DnD:next fails, Hasbro will shelf the lable rather than than selling it, which is a actually a smart move.
I know there's a thread for stupid questions, but, what exactly did you mean by shelving the label? is that for 5e? |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36863 Posts |
Posted - 18 May 2012 : 15:54:31
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sightless
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
If going by Mr.Bie earlier explanation of the use of spell slots for spells, would not that make the spells memorized by a wizard a bit crowded. If Mr.Mearls is to be believed he wants to reduce the number of spell slots and if i remember correctly, the spell slots in 3e/3.5e was not exactly a lot. There is going to be a bit more than grumbling here and if this "DnD Next" flops, then what is going to happen?DND 6e?
For some comparison, a 3E wizard @ 10th level with an Intelligence score of 20 has 22 spell slots from 1st thru 5th level. That's quite a bit nor does this include cantrips OR magic items like wands, scrolls, staffs, or rods. So if you reduce this total by a small margin but still give them at-will spells that are useful throughout their career, it sort of mitigates power inflation and spell-less wizards.
If DnD:next fails, Hasbro will shelf the lable rather than than selling it, which is a actually a smart move.
I know there's a thread for stupid questions, but, what exactly did you mean by shelving the label? is that for 5e?
He means that if D&D:Next (aka 5E) fails, his expectation will be that Hasbro will no longer produce D&D material, and that they will sit on the IP, rather than sell it off.
Much like toylines -- many toylines have died off, but Hasbro (or other toy makers) have kept the rights, and in some cases brought back the toylines years later. GI Joe is an excellent example, as is Star Wars. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 19 May 2012 : 12:33:24
|
Thanks Wooly, thoughts what he meant.
|
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 21 May 2012 : 05:50:45
|
Hmm if going by Dalor Darden funny example does that mean a level 30 wizard get to throw a 30d6 fireball? I remember it was capped at 15 in 3.5e right?
Still there is also the whole prestige class and multiclass thing...? |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 21 May 2012 : 05:58:06
|
Yes, in original AD&D a wizard's fireball did dice in damage equal to his level...so yes, it would be a 30d6 Fireball. But hey...at around 90 damage average on the dice, and then a successful save you only might take 45 damage from a 3rd level spell! If a wizard is fighting someone as an individual, it would be MUCH better to hit them with a FIRST LEVEL Magic Missile spell that did 15d4+15 damage as a 30th level wizard. That is only about 45 damage still...but there is no save for that and you have only used a level 1 spell instead.
 |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 22 May 2012 : 06:11:15
|
| Keep on preparing magic missiles and we will finish this campaign faster than you can say "Meteor Swarm!"!!! |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 22 May 2012 : 10:47:38
|
Shield spell or brooch/amulet/ring of shielding, anyone?
Assuming higher level counterspells like (minor) globe of invulnerability or anti-magic shell aren't used. And imagine the joy on that magic-user's face when he discovers his target is protected by any of several kinds of spell reflection, absorption, or resonance - he and his allies might be mildly displeased when 15 magic missiles richochet right back to their source, power the target's magic, or simply reinforce the target's magical defenses - in addition to whatever action(s) the target would normally choose to perform.
But my point is not whether this-or-that particular spell could dominate and break the game - because I'm sure that stubborn people will persistently argue specific examples until they find particular spells which accomplish exactly that (saying a lot about how they play games). My point is that even in AD&D (1E) rules, the most successful magic-users were those who made the most clever use of their magics, of all their magics, of even the lowliest most ignored magics ... not those magic-users who could simply splatter the most dice across the table. An archmage with an "unstoppable" gimmick is basically just a one-trick pony, handled easily enough by lesser magic-users who apply their spellcraft with more cunning and talent.
Prior to D&D 3E, spellcasters did not have a grand shopping list of spells available right in the PHB (next to the magic items) which they could always peruse and acquire. They were forced to make best use of any spells they could procure or research in-game, very often that meant they simply didn't have a certain spell they really "needed" or wanted, sometimes it contributed towards their choice of which spellcasting villains to attack*. I personally mourn the greatest loss of this system, a concept which seems entirely extinct and alien by the 4E era - the power and personalization of spellcasters (of all levels) inventing and researching their own unique spells to compensate for their peculiar needs and weaknesses. Along with the pride and accomplishment, and awe and respect and intimidation, held by magic-users who could cast unique (and often recognizable) "signature" spells.
* Captured spellbook = #winning |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 22 May 2012 12:57:50 |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 22 May 2012 : 19:43:53
|
I have always said that despite the huge number of dice that 1e casters could use; their magic was far more limited than in later editions.
Simply memorizing spells could take DAYS...not just an hour as in 3e.
Many times I'm actually being sarcastic about the number of dice that could be rolled on the table...dice are meaningless when they can't hurt the target! |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Seravin
Master of Realmslore
Canada
1296 Posts |
Posted - 22 May 2012 : 20:17:02
|
| Wasn't fireball capped at 10d6 in 2nd edition? Or do you mean 1st edition? I have to seek out my 1st Edition PH... |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 22 May 2012 : 20:49:51
|
quote:
Originally posted by Seravin
Wasn't fireball capped at 10d6 in 2nd edition? Or do you mean 1st edition? I have to seek out my 1st Edition PH...
It was capped in 2e...but in 1e there was no cap. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Sightless
Senior Scribe
USA
608 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 03:43:56
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
Shield spell or brooch/amulet/ring of shielding, anyone?
Assuming higher level counterspells like (minor) globe of invulnerability or anti-magic shell aren't used. And imagine the joy on that magic-user's face when he discovers his target is protected by any of several kinds of spell reflection, absorption, or resonance - he and his allies might be mildly displeased when 15 magic missiles richochet right back to their source, power the target's magic, or simply reinforce the target's magical defenses - in addition to whatever action(s) the target would normally choose to perform.
But my point is not whether this-or-that particular spell could dominate and break the game - because I'm sure that stubborn people will persistently argue specific examples until they find particular spells which accomplish exactly that (saying a lot about how they play games). My point is that even in AD&D (1E) rules, the most successful magic-users were those who made the most clever use of their magics, of all their magics, of even the lowliest most ignored magics ... not those magic-users who could simply splatter the most dice across the table. An archmage with an "unstoppable" gimmick is basically just a one-trick pony, handled easily enough by lesser magic-users who apply their spellcraft with more cunning and talent.
Prior to D&D 3E, spellcasters did not have a grand shopping list of spells available right in the PHB (next to the magic items) which they could always peruse and acquire. They were forced to make best use of any spells they could procure or research in-game, very often that meant they simply didn't have a certain spell they really "needed" or wanted, sometimes it contributed towards their choice of which spellcasting villains to attack*. I personally mourn the greatest loss of this system, a concept which seems entirely extinct and alien by the 4E era - the power and personalization of spellcasters (of all levels) inventing and researching their own unique spells to compensate for their peculiar needs and weaknesses. Along with the pride and accomplishment, and awe and respect and intimidation, held by magic-users who could cast unique (and often recognizable) "signature" spells.
* Captured spellbook = #winning
Yes, I remember when my DM forgot I had ammulates of spell reflection. Oh the joy of it. |
We choose to live a lie, when we see with, & not through the eye.
Every decision, no matter the evidence, is a leap of faith; if it were not, then it wouldn't be a choice at all. |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 04:28:13
|
Very early in my gaming "career" I learned, by fighting the Drow in the Underdark as a Wizard, that the easiest thing to do with your magic when faced with a magic resistant enemy was to hit them via a "Messenger" spell.
For instance: instead of casting a fireball at the Drow, I learned it was easier to shatter the stone around them into shards that hurt non-magically. Perhaps turning the stone beneath their feet to mud...and on and on.
An object can easily be a messenger for a wizard. Magic doesn't have to travel from A to B; but often adding C is best.
A- Wizard Casts Spell
B- Cavern Chamber's roof shatters
C- Drow are covered in falling stone (or at least injured)
Magic Resistance was just too much too often back in the day (and often still is I guess!). |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36863 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 04:46:53
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
Very early in my gaming "career" I learned, by fighting the Drow in the Underdark as a Wizard, that the easiest thing to do with your magic when faced with a magic resistant enemy was to hit them via a "Messenger" spell.
For instance: instead of casting a fireball at the Drow, I learned it was easier to shatter the stone around them into shards that hurt non-magically. Perhaps turning the stone beneath their feet to mud...and on and on.
An object can easily be a messenger for a wizard. Magic doesn't have to travel from A to B; but often adding C is best.
A- Wizard Casts Spell
B- Cavern Chamber's roof shatters
C- Drow are covered in falling stone (or at least injured)
Magic Resistance was just too much too often back in the day (and often still is I guess!).
Indirect attacks can be very effective, and are often overlooked. I'm a fan of them, myself. Having not played D&D in a while, I've not been able to do much more than think up a nifty indirect attack when the opportunity presents itself -- but I've used them to great effect in Warmachine. I've used Nemo's chain lightning, targeting the easy to hit guy, and then let it arc into the difficult to hit people next to him. I also once used voltaic snare to turn my opponent's jacks into a barrier that he couldn't get around -- I targeted the center one of three jacks walking thru a narrow gap in the scenery, and they became a wall blocking the rest of his army!  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 05:49:14
|
| Does that mean in 5e there will be less spells listed? |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36863 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 10:43:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
Does that mean in 5e there will be less spells listed?
Even if there are less spells initially, there will eventually be a huge number to choose from. I think 1E was the only edition that didn't have a constant flow of new/updated spells.
Not saying this is a bad thing, just pointing out the trend. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Xar Zarath
Senior Scribe
Malaysia
552 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 13:40:59
|
| Hmm did they create more spells to make life easier or did they just want to sell more supplements?? |
Everything ends where it begins. Period.
|
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 14:20:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
Hmm did they create more spells to make life easier or did they just want to sell more supplements??
I don't think it had more to do with selling supplements directly...that was just a bonus. I think they wanted to expand options and "give greater depth" to a world of fantasy.
There were some few "extra" spells made for 1e Forgotten Realms: Unearthed Arcana, the Grey Box itself, and a couple of magical oriented books printed for the Forgotten Realms.
With the coming of 2e however, the list became so long that it actually took FOUR TOMES to compile them all! It only got WORSE with later editions... |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Lord Karsus
Great Reader
USA
3745 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 20:54:46
|
| -Hey, I've never counted more spells, items, feats, and so on as bad things. The only time I don't like their inclusion in books is when they're generic spells/items/feats/etc. that are included in Forgotten Realms books. To me, if you're going to include mechanical things like that in setting specific books, make those mechanical things relevant to the setting/book. If, in the 5e Forgotten Realms main campaign book, they include spells, make them Forgotten Realms specific spells (either things that have been featured in past Forgotten Realms products that sort of have an attachment to the setting, or something as simple as attaching a creator name, where the creator is a Forgotten Realms character); if they include weapons, make them Forgotten Realms specific monsters, and so on. |
(A Tri-Partite Arcanist Who Has Forgotten More Than Most Will Ever Know)
Elves of Faerûn
Vol I- The Elves of Faerûn
Vol. III- Spells of the Elves
Vol. VI- Mechanical Compendium |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7989 Posts |
Posted - 23 May 2012 : 22:01:42
|
| To be fair, I think a lot of the excesses and bad rep associated with 3E/3.5E were actually not Wizbro products at all ... for every spell, feat, item, class, monster, or book released by WotC there was an entire library of d20/OGL variations. |
[/Ayrik] |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36863 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2012 : 00:52:41
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
To be fair, I think a lot of the excesses and bad rep associated with 3E/3.5E were actually not Wizbro products at all ... for every spell, feat, item, class, monster, or book released by WotC there was an entire library of d20/OGL variations.
Honestly, I don't recall anyone complaining about third-party splatbooks... All the complaints I heard about too much source material pertained to things like the endless line of Complete books, or the also endless line of Races of books. Third-party stuff rarely gets mentioned, unless it's something people have found that fit niches WotC didn't cover, like Faeries, from Bastion Press, or unless it's a third-party campaign setting, like the Iron Kingdoms. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Dalor Darden
Great Reader
USA
4211 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2012 : 01:22:33
|
| There was a section on Faeries in Magic of Faerun...well, not strictly devoted to them; but still a great deal of information. |
The Old Grey Box and AD&D for me! |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36863 Posts |
Posted - 24 May 2012 : 03:14:32
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dalor Darden
There was a section on Faeries in Magic of Faerun...well, not strictly devoted to them; but still a great deal of information.
True, but it's not a whole sourcebook -- Faeries is a wonderful sourcebook, and one I heartily recommend. I've got a couple of half-fae Realms NPCs wandering around me noggin, right now.  |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
5e Wizard and Sorcerer
