Search results

I'm not disputing the fact that these spells are superior for combat. I'm disputing the fact that they are all-around superior, because usefulness in combat is not the only measure of a spell. Case in point: in one of my playtests, the wizard had shocking grasp and ray of frost, and she did...

Apples and oranges. Magic is a competitive game where the purpose is to defeat the other player. D&D is a cooperative storytelling game where the purpose is to have fun pretending to be someone else. Usefulness depends on the campaign and the group's style. Are Ray of Frost, Chill Youch and...

But why? If the player doesn't like the fact that the cantrip exists, why would be tempted by it? Wouldn't he go "I'm so glad I can take these utility cantrips, instead of taking pew-pew ones!"? Mind you, if DDN followed the 4e system, where attacks and utilities were separate categories and...

Keep up with what? It's perfectly viable to have a wizard with Light, Minor Illusion and Read Magic as his cantrips. Will he play differently than a wizard with Chill Touch, Ray of Frost and Shocking Grasp? Yes, definitely. And that's the whole point: covering a wide range of playstyles, from...

But if someone doesn't want a game with at-will magical attacks, then why think those cantrips are better than the others? Is there a pressure to have an at-will damaging cantrip (as opposed to, say, use a crossbow, throw a dagger or even have *no* viable at-will attack)? The way I see it...

I disagree with the statement that in previous editions wizards (and before them mages and magic-users) had more daily spells. In all previous editions, the wizard started with *one* first level spell (bonus spells were very rare, when they existed at all), and if you wanted the ability to cast...

Martial buffers, as in a warlord's inspiration-based buffs? I could see a "stance" (to use a 4e term) based build that would grant buffs to allies as long as the character is in that stance (something like "battlefield awareness stance", allowing allies to move without opportunity attacks and...

http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/dndqa/20140214 1 - "Doesn't the concentration rule effectively eliminate lower-level buff spells from a caster's repertoire once they get higher-level spells that are more effective?" 2 - "Would it be possible to have a feat that would allow...

"The arrow hits Elspeth, but her armor and the padding underneath keep the arrowhead from causing more than a minor puncture on her shoulder. It will sting for a while, causing her some discomfort when she moves. A few more such hits and she might not be able to last much longer".

More so than extra attacks, Fighters currently get other stuff that makes them remarkably unwilling to die. At 9th they are getting Defy Death (Con save to avoid being reduced to 0 hp, instead going for 1), and at 13th they are getting the equivalent to Magic Resistance, but for everything...

I'd love to see weapon properties being included as an optional benefit you can unlock with a feat. Seems like the perfect spot for Weapon Specialization...

Hey, cool beans! :thumbs up:

And I will objectively tell you you're mistaken. If for no other reason than the fact that several artists for 3e and 4e also worked on 1e and 2e (including, but not limited to, Larry Elmore, Jeff Easley, Brom, Tom Baxa, Tony DiTerlizzi, Wayne Reynolds and Todd Lockwood).

I am. Who gave you that scoop? :) I'll try to find a box for you.

You alter what can restore hp. If hp = meat, only magic or long term rests restore hp. If hp = abstract, a simple "breather" may restore them.

I knew I liked you for a reason! :D

So you're saying it's a dealbreaker if it's not there? Like, breaking the deal on a miss? ;)

Interestingly, magic-users got those spells when they hit 3rd (levitate) and 5th (fly) levels. But they also used the most expensive XP chart. A rogue with the same XP would be 4th or 6th level. Now that everyone uses the same XP chart, I think those spells could be bumped up one spell level...

"Spare the Dying" isn't a problem, IMHO, because it is part of the "campaign lethality" dial that each DM and group can adjust to their liking. If you prefer games of heroic action, where PCs rarely die, you're good to go. If you prefer grittier games, where PC death is a possiblity, you can...

You and I have very different views of what "Take 10" means. To me, "all due diligence" isn't "Take 10", it's "Take 20". "Take 10", to me, means doing the basic effort to get an acceptable, professional result. It's an average result, no more, no less. It's not slacking, but just enough to "get by".