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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ahnehnois" data-source="post: 6194748" data-attributes="member: 17106">Yes, but AFAIK, systems that do use the same mechanics for both don't use a spell system for both. Let alone a crappy spell system.I'm all for putting magic on the same system as everything else. In a d20 context, I'm all for making magic a d20 commodity; skill-based most likely. d20+modifiers vs DC; that's how d20 works. Of course, those skills would be no more equal in power than, say, Swim and Decipher Script. They're completely different things.I'm not in favor of taking a magic system that is idiosyncratic if not archaic, and which deviates from the normal d20 mechanics, and using it for nomagical abilities. Even if you take as valid the opinion of the "fighters and magicians must be equal" crowd, their perspective basically boils down to "magic is broken, so therefore everyone should have an equal amount of it". It's pretty self-apparent how bad of an idea this is. Wouldn't it be better to fix everything equally rather than break it equally?I'm saying they shouldn't necessarily. Their degree of protagonism, as you put it, should not be considered as a function of the rules, but of the rules and the participants at the table. If a DM wants to make a particular character a protagonist, or make all of his PCs equally so, or defer that decision in some manner, all of those are fine ways to go.I don't see that anything is gained by restricting all players of the game to one approach, or why having players have unequal degrees of what you refer to as protagonism is apparently verboten to all who roleplay.Whoever wrote the Goad feat, or the PHBII knight, or various other things like those.</blockquote>

Verification