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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jgbrowning" data-source="post: 649209" data-attributes="member: 5724">Re: Re: Re: Re: wellI haven't read any of his other stuff. Mostly because it a bit harder to get a hold of.The 1 in 50 number is taken from the DMG demographics section. If you break the assumed populace down into the communities listed and use the statistical averages for spellcasters you end up with something like 1 in 50.  I did it once, actually i think the number was closer to 1 in 40 (damn, maybe 1 in 35?, can't remember), but i was trying to be conservative.Well, almost all defensive magical tactics, IMHO, are rendered moot in a situation where the wizards are responsible for defending such a large group of people. True, they aint peasants their soldiers, but they still have no way outside of magical counterattacks/countermeasures to defend themselves against a flying improved invised fireballwanding wizards.A lot of the traditional countermeasures are only effective under small group situations. No surprisingly, because that'swhat the rules are designed for <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />.I totally agree with your "he's a marked man." statement. Yep he is, but unfortunately he's probably already a marked man because he's in an opposing force.  Outside of chivalric/humanistic conventions he's already in trouble with the other side.But that's what i'm talking about when i speak of retaliation. Some people won't fight you if they think you'll have their family killed if you attack them.This might be the case, but i'd find it very hard to believe that once one side starts losing they'll just give up without starting the "unfriendly" big magical type of war. Unless your dealing with massive epic level type magic, the cold war anology probably doesn't hold. I kinda view what your saying more like "We agree to not use magic too much, because that will get us all killed real quick." But again, once a side starts to lose, IMHO, maintaining that kind of pact would be difficult.I'm not so much interested in tactic either as every tactic is pretty situational. But i do think there is a bais to DnD to favor offensive over defensive magic (see my other post here, interested in your opinions) that determines what type of stuff is possible.  ie. what is balanced.Double heh. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />  Yeah, but i was more concerned with troop movements, army compositions, logistic resources etc... That type of info would be impossible to hide in a DnD world.Agreed, and Vice Versa. This is one reason why i like ENworld over other places. By now most people would be shouting at each other and calling each other's game ideas stupid.  Ah, civility is sorely missed.joe b.</blockquote>

Verification