Search results

In Candlekeep Mysteries(Page 10) the First Reader of Candlekeep is a Green Dragonborn. One of the Great Readers is a Bronze Dragonborn. I haven't run any of the adventures from that book yet, but I did remember those from when my players went to Candlekeep for some research of their own.

You're missing the point. It doesn't matter that they designed the setting to showcase 3e, because 1e, 2e, 4e and 5e work just as well. They may have designed it during 3e and with 3e in mind, but it's not in any way TIED to 3e. I can run it with literally any other edition and it's still...

It's even harsher on crafters than adventurers. At least the adventurers are earning a decent amount of XP. There are more than a dozen. Even Dragonlance, one of the least supported, had 5 magic users of 17+ in level, and 3 are 18+. In mass production, it would be a struggle to get to 2nd...

Sure. It's right here. 1e DMG page 11 "Therefore, when any ability score reaches 16, then it should be ruled a wish will have the effect of increasing the ability by only 1/10th of a point. Thus, by means of wishes (or wishes and/or alter reality spells) a charisma score of 16 can only be...

We were talking about con, not levels. They aren't ever going to need 10 wishes, because 17 and higher constitution doesn't give more hit points.

It's memorized. It takes less than a minute to cast. Then you spend half a week(on average) resting and memorize it again, moving on to the next magic item. Raistlin: 20th Par-Salian: 18th Fistandantilus: 20th+ Ladonna and Justarian were merely 17th. And that's with one of the least...

It did need a feat. The feat was just free. I mean, that's what I said in the quote there. ;) No cherry picking involved at all. It was simply the first wonderous item that could be done at caster level 5. Nah. 17 and 18 didn't do anything for magic users. No point in trying to go above...

Maybe you didn't read the 1e supplements that I did. Archmages were all over. Given how long it takes to level, you don't want to be giving up hundreds of levels mass producing magic items. Aaaaand, once you had Wish you could cast it every single day. That's because they mass produce magic...

First, it's 25 gold. 1(spell level) x 1(caster level) x 25gp. Second, it cost a negligible amount of XP for that 1st level scroll, so he couldn't do it with just starting gold and the feat. He'd have to earn some XP. That's wrong. You have to be able to cast the spells required to make the...

It wasn't much higher than permanency and LOTS of wizards got there. No. There was no XP cost like there is for literally every magic item in 3e. While it was easier to do and happened at lower levels, it quite literally cost the spellcaster permanent personal power. There was no casting a...

As I said, they can just Wish any losses back. There's a basis in the rules prior to 3e as well, making 3e's rules not really relevant. It doesn't really matter if the designers were inspired by the 3e rules, those rules are not a part of Eberron's theme. Quite literally every other edition of...

That's a pretty common mistake you are making there. That automatic loss of con pertains to the spells made permanent in the spell description, not all castings of permanency. The spell does not talk about magic item creation. "The magic-user casts the desired spell and then follows with the...

Looking at the FR Campaign Setting for 3e, it seems to be higher than that. Under Mage Fairs it says, "Any town or city with a population of more than a dozen wizards and sorcerers is likely to host an annual mage fair." Without even looking at every other class, there are towns(not even...

No. 1e and 2e have spells in the PHB explicitly so that PCs can make magic items. PCs making magic items and spells was a staple of TSR. The knowledge to make artifacts and relics has been lost I believe, but by no means is the knowledge to make magic items anything but common in those...

It assumes no such thing. What it does assume is that NPCs make lots of magic items and cast lots of spells, backed up by literally every edition ever. PCs don't make enough magic items, even in 3e, to have any affect at all on Eberron or any other official setting. Not even a drop in the...

It negates it completely. If Eberron was "built specifically for 3e mechanics," but BECMI, 1e, 2e, 4e, and 5e do functionally the same thing, then they it wasn't really built around 3e mechanics. It was simply a theme that relied on the creation of magic items and common magic, which every...

Yeah. Back in 3e it really bothered my group that fighters became more likely to fumble every round as they rose in level gaining extra attacks. So what we did was make it so that at levels 1-5, you fumbled normally. At levels 6-10, if you fumbled you got a DC 15 dex check that turned the...

Even those events didn't really change anything. I've been running FR since 1e. When 2e brought the Time of Troubles, I adopted that because I liked it. When the Spell Plague and Sundering arrived, I didn't adopt those because I didn't like them. When you take all the FR lore from every...

None of which changes what I've been saying even the slightest bit. 1e is every bit as likely to result in an Eberron as 3e was. Magic items creation being entirely player facing doesn't make magic items more common in that edition than any other.

Don't mistake the pushback against your premise as folks being against new settings. It's just the idea that the setting needs to be tied to the editions mechanics that is flawed. Not only isn't that a need, it really isn't ever done. Even Eberron wasn't really tied to 3e's mechanics, as I've...