Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N0Man" data-source="post: 5052492" data-attributes="member: 64066">Seriously, do you realize how many little notes and rules have been added to a lot of simple spells over the years to prevent them from being abused by "creative spellcasting"?Take the simple level 1 spell Enlarge.  In 2E, the text "the spell cannot be used to crush a creature by growth" was added from the original AD&D because players would want to do stuff like enlarge a person in their armor and crush them to death in it with a level 1 spell.  In 3E, they added, "Multiple  magical  effects  that  increase size  do  not  stack", because players decided that 2 Enlarges are better than 1.That's just one example.Many spells have had additional disclaimers and restrictions added onto them over time through the various editions in order to prevent certain overpowered "creative casting".  For you to tell me that cheesing encounters is not possible in a true RPG, only in a CRPG, is completely false.What some people believe (including the 4E designers) was that casters just had so many tricks up their sleeves, frequently that were used in ways that weren't really intended, that they frequently overshadowed non-magic users to severe degrees.  All too often the result of the challenge is more about the characters (and classes), not the players.It's really obvious that 4E design is intentionally working to try to allow different classes share the spotlight and get their chances too.  Magic users weren't pushed into the backseat, but rather everyone else is getting more turns in the front seat now.As it was pointed out by someone else... the scenario I presented neglected to consider just how common scrolls were in 3E.  It's been a while since I played, so I almost forgot about that.  It kind of makes the point for either of us rather moot.</blockquote>

Verification