Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="scholz" data-source="post: 913943" data-attributes="member: 10028">My limited experience with it showed me it was really broken. The Psionic Warrior in the party basically had super powers that gave him super strength, speed, and stoneskin 24 hours a day. It was really annoying. Actually my experience with EoM was somewhat similar, though I experienced it as a DM instead of as a player.I think the idea of the scaling by MP is a good change.&nbsp; I think the main power problem I had was not the access to many high level spells. In fact the high level spells seemed kind of lame and uninteresting compared to Core rules higher level spells. (maybe this is prejudice from 1st edition I have). I guess that would reduce the problem of the power gaming somewhat. That and scaling back the number of spell lists per level. My main concern about power was the versatility. If that too is being reduced I think that is a good thing. Then the only real problem would be covering the minutae of spells. I think you need to be able to create and use simple spells like &quot;darkvision&quot; or &quot;water breathing&quot; that might not scale appropriately. The MP cost instead of level difference is a start. But why would l use a spell-slot for &quot;water breathing&quot; with only one or two variations, when I could spend the same spell slot on &quot;evoke lightning&quot; with dozens of variations (damage, area, etc..)?Any fix looks like to me like it would go the path of point based gaming &quot;Hero System, GURPS&quot; or the like. [Maybe using different costs for differently versatile spells). That is fine, but I don't think it fits the genre very well. Of course, I would be happy to be wrong. Am I to take from your comments that the revised EoM will over ride the (ahem) FAQ-Errata that was just published. One last question. Any discount for previous buyers of EoM on the revision? I appreciate the fact you guys can take some constructive criticism. That is very cool.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="scholz, post: 913943, member: 10028"] [B] My limited experience with it showed me it was really broken. The Psionic Warrior in the party basically had super powers that gave him super strength, speed, and stoneskin 24 hours a day. It was really annoying. Actually my experience with EoM was somewhat similar, though I experienced it as a DM instead of as a player. I think the idea of the scaling by MP is a good change. I think the main power problem I had was not the access to many high level spells. In fact the high level spells seemed kind of lame and uninteresting compared to Core rules higher level spells. (maybe this is prejudice from 1st edition I have). I guess that would reduce the problem of the power gaming somewhat. That and scaling back the number of spell lists per level. My main concern about power was the versatility. If that too is being reduced I think that is a good thing. Then the only real problem would be covering the minutae of spells. I think you need to be able to create and use simple spells like "darkvision" or "water breathing" that might not scale appropriately. The MP cost instead of level difference is a start. But why would l use a spell-slot for "water breathing" with only one or two variations, when I could spend the same spell slot on "evoke lightning" with dozens of variations (damage, area, etc..)? Any fix looks like to me like it would go the path of point based gaming "Hero System, GURPS" or the like. [Maybe using different costs for differently versatile spells). That is fine, but I don't think it fits the genre very well. Of course, I would be happy to be wrong. Am I to take from your comments that the revised EoM will over ride the (ahem) FAQ-Errata that was just published. One last question. Any discount for previous buyers of EoM on the revision? I appreciate the fact you guys can take some constructive criticism. That is very cool.[/b] [/QUOTE]

Verification