Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Verequus" data-source="post: 2278434" data-attributes="member: 9135">Ah, I wondered already, where the FAQ is - but it was my pleasure to get you started. You've saved me from finishing this work, because I'd wanted to show RW the questions for improving the compilation. Did you include the unanswered questions somewhere? I haven't been able yet to look through every file. And regarding the correct attributing - don't worry so much about this. It is nice to see your name in it, but who knows after all these months, what he exactly wrote? Furthermore, one thing what I don't like is, that you haven't edited the questions far enough - for example, FAQ entries don't need to include praisings, how good EoMR is: Those, who read it, know this already! <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing    :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /> More seriously, a FAQ entry should state the most actual information and should not have changes added after itself. Also, the entry shouldn't leave any questions open, but be self-contained.But now, here are my suggested changes to improve the FAQ:Use in the main file name the word "index" - even after reading your readme file, I had a little trouble to find it.Links back to the index file would be nice.Main file:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Lycenia Arcana" is spelled "Lyceian Arcana".   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The first miscellaneous question regarding the patch can be deleted - the patch is already applied to the RPGnow-file. </li> </ul>Magical Classes: Class-related Questions:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">You can delete at the first question "Page 7:"   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Earlier today I looked at EoM Revised for the first time and came away very intruiged and interested in using it. But I have a few questions." can be deleted.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Why is there no Charm, Compel, Create or Move Specialist feats? What might they do, if they did exist? Can we expect to see them in Lycean Arcana?" Charm and Compel Specialist do exist now, so you can remove those references.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"How could/would you impliment these feats -- as feats -- not just through combining spell lists?" Only after reading the answer one knows, what is exactly asked. Also the answer needs further fixing, but without access to the original post I can't provide that.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"How would you handle the requirement for a prestige class that needed one of these feats (Elemental Savant from T&B for example)?" Only after reading the answer one knows, what is exactly asked.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Is Spell Focus still available?" This question can be deleted. </li> </ul>Spell Elements:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Metamagic feats: Is the DC not increased through the extra paid MP? I didn't found a direct mentioning of that, but the example of Intense Spell implies it, along with core rules." This is going to be revised in the compilation, so this question will be unnecessary.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Are spells with 0 MP for one or more lists allowed (except Gen 0)? Can someone get cantrip-effects for free, if spells with normal MP-costs are used like Evoke Fire 5/Evoke Death 0/Evoke Lava 0/Gen 2?" This question has been probably posted before the publishing of EoMR ans is already answered in it.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Will the Elements of Magic be compatible for epic play?" A supplement will handle all open questions.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"I would also like a better description of why the MP limit for casting a spell rises so quickly when learning from the same spell list. I better description would be of help... It seems that low level characters can generally specialize in something like transform, placing 4 lists in varing forms of transform, and be able to spend every point of thier power for one big effect. What would be the reason for building a system like this?" The question should be reformulated a bit: "Why rises the MP limit for casting a spell so quickly when learning several spell lists from the same action type? It seems that low level characters can generally specialize in something like transform, placing 4 lists in varing forms of transform, and be able to spend every point of thier power for one big effect. What would be the reason for building a system like this?"   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Some questions with page designations should have those removed.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">""Diogenes's Deshackling (Dispel Magic 13/Gen 2)": Shouldn't the name be "Diogenes' Deshackling"? And the spell is a Dispel Magic 14/Gen 1." The reference to English grammar seems to be unnecessary.   </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Actually, there are more elements with no friendly elements - next to Life all of the unifying elements. Furthermore, I have to admit, that I don't like it, that several instances forbid the knowledge of some spell lists - one of the very things I like about the specialisation feats is, that you can become a specialist of everything (except Create ) without sacrifacing knowledge." No mentioning, that this question is regarding the Elemental feats. </li> </ul>Because I don't have enough time for everything, I've left some minor adjustments out  - if you read through the questions, the places should should be clear. The other files I'm going to leave to the others - erstwhile now.</blockquote>

Verification