Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next Q&A 9/20
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="gweinel" data-source="post: 6019076" data-attributes="member: 2165"><p>I don't like where wizards tradition are going for a couple of reasons. </p><p></p><p>I don't like the idea and the fluff behind it. "If you are illusionist you can cast more often invisibility (or any other illusion spell)". A specialist is compared to the general wizard only by the number and the frequency of the spells? That is that makes you special? For me is not enough. </p><p></p><p>I would love to see each tradition to have more unique things to do. Exclusive spells and maybe powers. A summoner is the person who has contacts to other planes, he knows names of monsters and unique beings and the secrets behind these names. He knows its strength and weakness and can bind a creature until that creature complete his quest. For a summoner to call a creature is not only to dispatch enemies in combat as the limited knowledge of a generalist wizard might be. For a summoner the summoned creature could help in all three pillars of the game from the 1st lvl. </p><p></p><p>I know my example is not perfect, but i think this kind approach would make a tradition more unique and not just a simple (bad imho) mechanic to rise or low the frequency and number of spells.</p><p></p><p>Another issue that bothers me in this kind of approach is that if you want to have both the 4e and 1-3e players happy you will have augmented versions of each spell. I don't know if this is exactly a good design approach. Too many infos for different mechanics in the same text will cause a good amount of confusion. </p><p></p><p>Having said that i would like to say that i don't mind at will and encounter based spells, but i don't want em in my game. This playstyle is not for me and probably for any low magic campaign. The long awaited wizards tradition go to this kind of play style. I hope at least to present some different options for ppl who don't like high magic and high fantasy games. <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=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="gweinel, post: 6019076, member: 2165"] I don't like where wizards tradition are going for a couple of reasons. I don't like the idea and the fluff behind it. "If you are illusionist you can cast more often invisibility (or any other illusion spell)". A specialist is compared to the general wizard only by the number and the frequency of the spells? That is that makes you special? For me is not enough. I would love to see each tradition to have more unique things to do. Exclusive spells and maybe powers. A summoner is the person who has contacts to other planes, he knows names of monsters and unique beings and the secrets behind these names. He knows its strength and weakness and can bind a creature until that creature complete his quest. For a summoner to call a creature is not only to dispatch enemies in combat as the limited knowledge of a generalist wizard might be. For a summoner the summoned creature could help in all three pillars of the game from the 1st lvl. I know my example is not perfect, but i think this kind approach would make a tradition more unique and not just a simple (bad imho) mechanic to rise or low the frequency and number of spells. Another issue that bothers me in this kind of approach is that if you want to have both the 4e and 1-3e players happy you will have augmented versions of each spell. I don't know if this is exactly a good design approach. Too many infos for different mechanics in the same text will cause a good amount of confusion. Having said that i would like to say that i don't mind at will and encounter based spells, but i don't want em in my game. This playstyle is not for me and probably for any low magic campaign. The long awaited wizards tradition go to this kind of play style. I hope at least to present some different options for ppl who don't like high magic and high fantasy games. :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Next Q&A 9/20
Top