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
Flesh to Stone spell - why the poor rating
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="Gadget" data-source="post: 7431309" data-attributes="member: 23716"><p>The people posting in this thread seem to, for one (or more than one). Though, you are right in that many casual gamers may arguably not notice the difference. Though, in my limited anecdotal experience, these are also the types of games where it may be forgotten or glossed over that the caster needs to maintain concentration for the full 10 rounds for the effects to stick, or forget about concentration all together; or forget or gloss over some other key aspect of the spell. If they're still having fun, then more power to them! Not everyone fits</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think you are quite right to not depend overmuch on others' spell ratings. And trying for perfect balance in all games and play styles is an unattainable goal. We should, as players, asses the spell based on our play style, experience, likes and dislikes, etc. I feel the debate lies in how much effort is put into making things of reasonable balance. One of the goals of this edition was to reduce the built in 'system mastery' that previous editions demanded. One of these elements of system mastery is 'trap' spell choices, choices that sound good/cool but in reality are quiet limited in effectiveness. I don't think it is too great of a burden to put on designers to balance spells with the rest of the system. Just shrugging and saying: "you can't have perfect balance" is giving the designers to much of a pass, IMHO.</p><p></p><p>Given further thought, I would revise my initial take and have the spell inflict the restrained condition immediately and force the target to spend an action on their turn to make a Con save to end the effect. This counters the argument about the spell not really does not do anything that lower level spells do (inflict the restrained condition) in that it does so without a save and forces the target to waste an action. So far this still parallels Otto's, but wait, the target becomes paralyzed if the save is failed, followed by the three failures before three success format before petrification sets in. This gives the spell a little more umf, as it inflicts a harsher condition if the initial save is failed, yet is little different than a Con based Hold Monster that is a level lower than this spell. True, the target does not end the effect with one successful save, but at one level higher, this is not too bad.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Gadget, post: 7431309, member: 23716"] The people posting in this thread seem to, for one (or more than one). Though, you are right in that many casual gamers may arguably not notice the difference. Though, in my limited anecdotal experience, these are also the types of games where it may be forgotten or glossed over that the caster needs to maintain concentration for the full 10 rounds for the effects to stick, or forget about concentration all together; or forget or gloss over some other key aspect of the spell. If they're still having fun, then more power to them! Not everyone fits I think you are quite right to not depend overmuch on others' spell ratings. And trying for perfect balance in all games and play styles is an unattainable goal. We should, as players, asses the spell based on our play style, experience, likes and dislikes, etc. I feel the debate lies in how much effort is put into making things of reasonable balance. One of the goals of this edition was to reduce the built in 'system mastery' that previous editions demanded. One of these elements of system mastery is 'trap' spell choices, choices that sound good/cool but in reality are quiet limited in effectiveness. I don't think it is too great of a burden to put on designers to balance spells with the rest of the system. Just shrugging and saying: "you can't have perfect balance" is giving the designers to much of a pass, IMHO. Given further thought, I would revise my initial take and have the spell inflict the restrained condition immediately and force the target to spend an action on their turn to make a Con save to end the effect. This counters the argument about the spell not really does not do anything that lower level spells do (inflict the restrained condition) in that it does so without a save and forces the target to waste an action. So far this still parallels Otto's, but wait, the target becomes paralyzed if the save is failed, followed by the three failures before three success format before petrification sets in. This gives the spell a little more umf, as it inflicts a harsher condition if the initial save is failed, yet is little different than a Con based Hold Monster that is a level lower than this spell. True, the target does not end the effect with one successful save, but at one level higher, this is not too bad. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Flesh to Stone spell - why the poor rating
Top