Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="scholz" data-source="post: 913840" data-attributes="member: 10028">I have playtested the EoM a bit and have decided to drop it from my games. The main reasons are:1. Unbalanced... Mages are like super Sorcerers with more spells, more flexibility, and more powerful spells. Ranged Healing for everyone!2. Spells too ambitious.... Spells like infuse with element too useful, a single spell can duplicate a half dozen other spells. 3. To Generic (the spells have very little character and the system seems to discourage colorful spell).... The option to 'personalize' spells is interesting but entirely left to house rules, well you could do that with the core rules. Since the EoM give no advice except a couple of examples. 4. Easy to Abuse... Take Armor Casting Boon, then multiclass as fighter. Get the power of Arcane spells with no real limitations. This is not a huge problem (equivalent to 1st edition multiclasses) but not balanced with other classes, no reason not to multiclass as a mage really. 5. Some minor annoyances:(a) detect magic should not also require intuit direction to find existing magic.(b) missing some key spell-lists (a useful low level armor spell, or reasonably long term light for example)(c) the elements and their side effects are still unclear, especially shadow, life, crystal, biomatter.So... in the final analysis. I dropped it. This was a good experiment. I am not sorry I played around with it. It really underscores the difficulty coming up with a system that is flexible but not too powerful. I think the spell list idea is interesting, and there is something be done there. Maybe Sorcerers could get something like that (maybe higher level spells of like kinds earlier). I am also optimistic that a MP system of some form could be developed. But I think basing the points on the sorcerer rather than the wisard would make more sense. Lastly, I do like the various spell-skill conversions. But, I think that there ought to be some features that do not cost MP.If there were more support and any feedback early on I might have tried to stick with it. But I have little confidence that EN Publishing is really behind this product.</blockquote>

Verification