Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 7520187" data-attributes="member: 1210">The &quot;at higher levels&quot; thing makes it overpowered, in my opinion.&nbsp; On top of that, I don't see a need to make this change. The efficaciousness of shield against magic missile is a longstanding tradition, as is its lack of effect against force damage in general. I don't see how rewriting shield in this way improves the game, it just gives a free powerup to wizards and others with access to shield, which they frankly don't need. I acknowledge that force damage is rare and won't come up much, so in practice, the 'immune to force damage' bit is not likely to make much of a difference, but the 'at higher levels' giving +5 to AC for multiple rounds is extremely overpowered.Also, giving immunity to a damage type- any damage type other than perhaps poison- should be well out of the purview of a 1st level spell, especially when it's in addition to other effects.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="the Jester, post: 7520187, member: 1210"] The "at higher levels" thing makes it overpowered, in my opinion. On top of that, I don't see a need to make this change. The efficaciousness of [i]shield[/i] against [i]magic missile[/i] is a longstanding tradition, as is its lack of effect against force damage in general. I don't see how rewriting [i]shield[/i] in this way improves the game, it just gives a free powerup to wizards and others with access to [i]shield[/i], which they frankly don't need. I acknowledge that force damage is rare and won't come up much, so in practice, the 'immune to force damage' bit is not likely to make much of a difference, but the 'at higher levels' giving +5 to AC for multiple rounds is [i]extremely overpowered.[/i] Also, giving immunity to a damage type- any damage type other than perhaps poison- should be well out of the purview of a 1st level spell, especially when it's in addition to other effects. [/QUOTE]

Verification