Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Joshua Randall" data-source="post: 9571099" data-attributes="member: 7737">Oh absolutely. The divisions into Weak and Strong is nonsensical from an actual AD&D gameplay point of view. It only makes sense in the gameBOOK as a way to differentiate “the group of spells in the catalogue if you admit you know Thayne” from “the group of spells in the catalogue if you hide that information”.There could be some convoluted in-world justification for it — once Beldon knows that Carr learned some of the truth from Thayne, Beldon gets nervous and doesn’t want Carr to learn “Strong” magic; but still needs Carr to learn some magic because otherwise… umm… something something the door? Yeah that actually doesn’t make much sense; but what else is new in this book.I think it’s just a way to split the paths for replay value.P.S. About AD&D Burning Hands: I originally said it was a primo AOE attack spell. It is not. At 1 HP damage per caster level, by the time Burning Hands does enough damage to be meaningful, you could cast Fireball instead. I was thinking of the, what is it, 1d6+ability modifier damage that modern Burning Hands does.For actual AD&D Burning Hands, its primary power is that it could set on fire any flammable materials in the cone. (As we all know: if fire didn’t solve your problems, you didn’t use enough fire.) So there were all kinds of debates about how BH should set on fire the target’s surcoat and hair and any paper (scrolls) being carried, etc.“If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball.”</blockquote>

Verification