Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5514032" data-attributes="member: 22779">Ok, you've banged this T1 Moathouse drum a few times, so let's set the record straigh.  What was being discussed at the time was the fact that sleep in AD&D is essentially an auto-win spell.  You went on and on about how it only works 50% of the time in T1.  That ignores the fact that the OTHER half of the time, it works perfectly fine and the wizard autowins the encounter.The ENTIRE point of that conversation is that the non-casters get ZERO autowins ever.  Not one.  Not a single one.  It doesn't matter if the wizard only autowins 1% of the time, it's the fact that he autowins AT ALL that was the point.Which bring it back around to this conversation.  The alignment rules are pretty specific.  If you are a good aligned cleric and you protect a murderer that you KNOW is guilty (and you know because your freaking GOD just told you), you're not going to be casting any spells anymore.It's going to be pretty obvious that you're lying when all of a sudden you can't so much as cure a paper cut.Now, you can adjust these rules to fit a different setting and that's fine.  Might be lots of fun.  But, I'm getting rather tired of trying to discuss people's homebrew settings who then try to frame the conversation as if this was standard in the rules.  Divinations DON'T have failure chances.  Detect Evil works 100% of the time, and it's trivially easy to get around any defenses.  Know Alignment is even better.  There's a list of plot destructing spells as long as my arm and I have zero interest in going line by line explaining how each one has to be accounted for in order to run a particular kind of adventure.The fact that you, RC, admit that the game changes because of these spells is pretty much proof of how intrusive these spells are.  My murder mystery switches to a court intrigue plot game, not because the players want to play that, not because I the DM want to run that, but because the rules constrain me in what can be played.I'd much rather use a system that doesn't dictate what I can play.  1e works rather well in this regard, simply by not having a lot of divination available.  4e works in exactly the same way - most of the plot destructo spells aren't available.  The big problem came in 2e and 3e where you had spell lists as long as your arm.See, my beef at the moment is that Pemerton's setting is the default for 3e.  That's how the game is written.  RC's setting is a homebrew that has started whacking the wizard with a nerf bat to limit what the wizard can do.  That's certainly one direction to go.But, it's not what the rules say.  If RC wants to discuss his homebrew setting, great.  I'm just getting tired of him trying to pass it off as how the rules are written.</blockquote>

Verification