Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Twowolves" data-source="post: 3132171" data-attributes="member: 18093">It wasn't imaginary! I lived in it, I know!There is no "claims to be based", it WAS based. The 1st ed DMG had a list of novels it was based on. No, it wasn't a 100% modeling of any one setting, that kind of stuff gets you sued (thus, no "hobbits", but "halflings" are just fine). D&D originally grew out of tabletop wargames, and those roots were deeper than any one source of fiction for a setting. But just because E.G.G. went way out into left field to get his magic system (most likely because he felt fire'n'forget was better suited to wargaming) doesn't invalidate the literary roots of D&D. Fafhrd & Grey Mouser, Conan, Three Hearts and Three Lions, Lord of the Rings, Dying Earth, all of these were the ingredients that went into making the game what it once was.  Yes, the SRD and the d20 system is the best ruleset yet for tailoring the game into any one of these. I never once claimed to have a problem with 3rd ed or d20. However, molding the game to one of these settings means stripping out the rest.I also made a distinction that these feats were not setting specific, or even an alternate magic system. Were this the case, these feats would be much easier to swallow. But they aren't, they are the direction that the CORE GAME is heading. And it IS like Diablo/Gauntlet. Calling my assertation unoriginal doesn't automatically make it so. If 4th ed came out tomorrow and these reserve feats were in them, would ANY spellcaster NOT take one? I doubt it, and that sets off red flags for me.Illusionists that can change their appearance? Hat of Disguise and/or Robe of Blending (minus the bonus to hide). 1800gp/30,000gp. Spellcasters that can breathe air? Clear Ioun Stone (minus the nourisment part)/Helm of Underwater Action (minus the vision boost)/Necklace of Adaptation (minus the poison protection. 4000gp/57,000gp/9000gp. All of these items do a little more than just the feat, but the feats also give other bonuses AND don't take up a magic item slot on the body. People have posted lots of mathmatical arguments about how the feats are sub-optimal in some situations, without acknowledging that they are far superior in others. A 6th level sorcerer can cast Scorching Ray for 4d6 flame, one target, ranged touch, no save ONCE, or can at the same level just NOT cast a spell and get a shorter range, 3d6 line area of affect (currently written with NO save, no roll to hit) AT WILL. People say that the character could do similar damage with a crossbow, but you can disarm/sunder a crossbow, and they will run out of bolts eventually. Only does around 10 points of damage? How much better would a Magic Missile do? Not much. I tried the most direct comparison I could think of, with the lightning reserve feat and Call Lightning, and the best response was "Call Lighting has better range". And a full round casting time too! So what? No they aren't identical, but when it comes down to it, why memorize Call Lightning (10'r, save for half) when you can get pretty close to it (3d6 line, no to hit, no save) all day long even after the cows come home? Spellcasters already have means of doing "something cool" every round. They are called wands and scrolls. But these are finite. If you start giving at will spell-like abilities, why bother with any bookkeeping at all? Get rid of hit points, get rid of healing spells, get rid of any of the dreaded "resource management" aspects of the game, and it now bears a striking resemblance to an FPS video game. Or Gauntlet.</blockquote>

Verification