Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Apprentice Wizard- Arcane Burst power
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9273160" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>I would personally rate Necrotic lower because a lot of things are at least resistant (e.g. many undead). Unless you mean these to be all equal within each grouping? I'd still rank Necrotic closer to Cold than Thunder. From what sources I have access to, Necrotic resist or immune creatures are at least twice as common in the collective (official) 5e bestiary.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Interesting that you framke this as the DM being aggressively dismissive and even antagonistic, while the player has made an extremely mild statement.</p><p></p><p>Because the thing I was seeing—the thing actually said in this thread—was much closer to...</p><p></p><p>Player: Wait. You said this was an 'Apprentice Mage.'</p><p>DM: I did say that, yes. What's up?</p><p>Player: How come they can do that magic burst action? I can't do that!</p><p>DM: Well, I don't design NPC stuff to be exactly the same as things players can do, so sometimes something like this might happen.</p><p>Player: But that's awful! How can you care so little about being diegetic?!</p><p>DM: It's not that I'm not serious about diegetic elements, it's that I don't think everything every vaguely-PC-like entity can do is something every player character should also be able to do. But if this one is a problem, we can work something out.</p><p>Player: But what about the <em>next</em> time you do this? What about if there's a "Green Recruit" who can do things Sally the Fighter can't?</p><p>DM: Then there will be some NPCs who have knowledge or skills that the PCs don't. I don't consider that a problem.</p><p></p><p><em>Numerous</em> people in this thread have explicitly said that if a player made mention of wanting to learn this "arcane burst," they would work with them to develop something.</p><p></p><p></p><p>While I'm with you on this at least in theory, I think there's still something to this response, if it is allowed to be more nuanced and positive, rather than the frankly annoying and unhelpful "just make something up, 4head."</p><p></p><p>That is, even in a system designed to have an existing answer for many things like this (such as 3e or 4e), keeping room for the designers to say, as 13A does, "If you need this, you know better than we do what shape that should take" can be acceptable for particularly off the wall player interests. </p><p></p><p>In the quoted case, it refers to the fact that 13A does not have an Epic version of the Linguist feat; the Adventurer tier gives you rough and ready adventure-centric competence in most common languages, while the Champion tier version makes you fluent in essentially all languages that you have any realistic chance of being able to learn. Hence, whatever the Epic version is, it's probably going to need to be that much further beyond the Champ-tier version as that one was beyond Adventurer, and that's a reasonable place for the rules to say, "this is genuinely better for you to figure out as befits your game."</p><p></p><p>This is not something a system should <em>rely on</em> for addressing gaps of this nature. I just think it is a valid approach for the really out there edge cases that no designer could realistically anticipate. Flexible framework rules can do a great deal and are sadly underappreciated in the modern design paradigm, but even they occasionally run into exceptional cases that require special attention.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9273160, member: 6790260"] I would personally rate Necrotic lower because a lot of things are at least resistant (e.g. many undead). Unless you mean these to be all equal within each grouping? I'd still rank Necrotic closer to Cold than Thunder. From what sources I have access to, Necrotic resist or immune creatures are at least twice as common in the collective (official) 5e bestiary. Interesting that you framke this as the DM being aggressively dismissive and even antagonistic, while the player has made an extremely mild statement. Because the thing I was seeing—the thing actually said in this thread—was much closer to... Player: Wait. You said this was an 'Apprentice Mage.' DM: I did say that, yes. What's up? Player: How come they can do that magic burst action? I can't do that! DM: Well, I don't design NPC stuff to be exactly the same as things players can do, so sometimes something like this might happen. Player: But that's awful! How can you care so little about being diegetic?! DM: It's not that I'm not serious about diegetic elements, it's that I don't think everything every vaguely-PC-like entity can do is something every player character should also be able to do. But if this one is a problem, we can work something out. Player: But what about the [I]next[/I] time you do this? What about if there's a "Green Recruit" who can do things Sally the Fighter can't? DM: Then there will be some NPCs who have knowledge or skills that the PCs don't. I don't consider that a problem. [I]Numerous[/I] people in this thread have explicitly said that if a player made mention of wanting to learn this "arcane burst," they would work with them to develop something. While I'm with you on this at least in theory, I think there's still something to this response, if it is allowed to be more nuanced and positive, rather than the frankly annoying and unhelpful "just make something up, 4head." That is, even in a system designed to have an existing answer for many things like this (such as 3e or 4e), keeping room for the designers to say, as 13A does, "If you need this, you know better than we do what shape that should take" can be acceptable for particularly off the wall player interests. In the quoted case, it refers to the fact that 13A does not have an Epic version of the Linguist feat; the Adventurer tier gives you rough and ready adventure-centric competence in most common languages, while the Champion tier version makes you fluent in essentially all languages that you have any realistic chance of being able to learn. Hence, whatever the Epic version is, it's probably going to need to be that much further beyond the Champ-tier version as that one was beyond Adventurer, and that's a reasonable place for the rules to say, "this is genuinely better for you to figure out as befits your game." This is not something a system should [I]rely on[/I] for addressing gaps of this nature. I just think it is a valid approach for the really out there edge cases that no designer could realistically anticipate. Flexible framework rules can do a great deal and are sadly underappreciated in the modern design paradigm, but even they occasionally run into exceptional cases that require special attention. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Apprentice Wizard- Arcane Burst power
Top