Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mad Hamish" data-source="post: 5635388" data-attributes="member: 25321">Where was treatmonk insulting to the poster?it's not subsumed. It's a 1/day option on top of casting a lot of other spells.Given a choice between a character who had the everything from the wizard including normal spell casting without the arcane bond casting ability or a character who had everything from the wizard with the arcane bond casting but didn't have their normal casting which one would you choose?He doesn't he points out that spellcasting is their most powerful abilities and the specialist wizards can cast about 20% more spells per day than a generalist.&nbsp; &nbsp; a) other people have shown that his argument holds in most levelsb) he has at least shown his case for 1 level, you have failed to make your case for any level at allc) even if he was wrong at it is practical at most levels at worst he probably would have a mid range case and found that it backed his case so didn't look any further. There's no reason to assume that he's being deviousfrom <a href="http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gamemastering.html#table-12-4-character-wealth-by-level" target="_blank">Gamemastering</a>Table: Character Wealth by LevelPC Level*&nbsp; &nbsp; Wealth2&nbsp; &nbsp; 1,000 gp3&nbsp; &nbsp; 3,000 gp4&nbsp; &nbsp; 6,000 gpnote the heading PC level?No it isn't, his case is that another way of covering for cases of rarely wanted spells is to have a few scrolls that you can use.&nbsp; Considering you've got his case wrong the rest of your argument isn't that good.&nbsp; &nbsp; &quot;Damaging Magic ItemsA magic item doesn't need to make a saving throw unless it is unattended, it is specifically targeted by the effect, or its wielder rolls a natural 1 on his save. &quot;a) again you've misread what he saidb) casting from scrolls is generally either very costly or less effective that casting it yourself. You can't cover a lot of cases with scrolls (damage/level spells for instance)c) somebody spending a bucketload of money to carry around a lot of spell scrolls would hardly be munckin, in fact it'd be severaly unoptimised</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mad Hamish, post: 5635388, member: 25321"] Where was treatmonk insulting to the poster? it's not subsumed. It's a 1/day option on top of casting a lot of other spells. Given a choice between a character who had the everything from the wizard including normal spell casting without the arcane bond casting ability or a character who had everything from the wizard with the arcane bond casting but didn't have their normal casting which one would you choose? He doesn't he points out that spellcasting is their most powerful abilities and the specialist wizards can cast about 20% more spells per day than a generalist. a) other people have shown that his argument holds in most levels b) he has at least shown his case for 1 level, you have failed to make your case for any level at all c) even if he was wrong at it is practical at most levels at worst he probably would have a mid range case and found that it backed his case so didn't look any further. There's no reason to assume that he's being devious from [url=http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/gamemastering.html#table-12-4-character-wealth-by-level]Gamemastering[/url] Table: Character Wealth by Level PC Level* Wealth 2 1,000 gp 3 3,000 gp 4 6,000 gp note the heading PC level? No it isn't, his case is that another way of covering for cases of rarely wanted spells is to have a few scrolls that you can use. Considering you've got his case wrong the rest of your argument isn't that good. "Damaging Magic Items A magic item doesn't need to make a saving throw unless it is unattended, it is specifically targeted by the effect, or its wielder rolls a natural 1 on his save. " a) again you've misread what he said b) casting from scrolls is generally either very costly or less effective that casting it yourself. You can't cover a lot of cases with scrolls (damage/level spells for instance) c) somebody spending a bucketload of money to carry around a lot of spell scrolls would hardly be munckin, in fact it'd be severaly unoptimised [/QUOTE]

Verification