Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting a good spell?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Cognomen's Cassowary" data-source="post: 6877538" data-attributes="member: 6801445"><p>Uh . . . no, I have not done that. I couched my conclusions in conditionals. I have been very careful not to proclaim any absolutes about the goodness or badness of the spell, and I have been clear that I am making generalizations. I have yet to use the word "objective" or its derivatives. I haven't even called what I have done "analysis." I have made my methodology plain so that anybody reading it can decide for him- or herself how applicable my conclusions are to his or her character and game, and I have said that there is no accounting for context and DM tendency.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, I said that ADHW will do more damage against seven or more enemies, though I don't understand why you continue to fixate on the numerical portion of my comparison. Yes, there are situations where ADHW is a (subjectively) better spell than chain lightning, as I have stated previously. There are, however, <em>more</em> situations where chain lightning is (subjectively) better, and I consider that to make it better on the whole, and that's my point in making generalizations. Coming at this as a sorcerer player whose character does not have a thematic school, gains only one spell per level, and will never have more than fifteen total, I find those kinds of generalizations very helpful, since having the perfect spell for every job is not an option. As a general and subjective rule, I prefer the spell that will have more application in more situations, if only because I have not yet worked up the nerve to "objectively" select my spells by random roll.</p><p></p><p>I use "to hit" as shorthand, since I am often talking about both ability scores and armor class. I can see where I've been inconsistent, so I will edit for clarity. If I confused you, I apologize. If you're just being peevish, I don't care.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I think that that bolded portion is too quickly overlooked with 5e's (somewhat dodgy) vision rules.</p><p></p><p>WIZARD: . . . so that's forty-five damage to all the archers who failed the save, and half to those who succeeded. That's the end of my turn.</p><p>DM: All right, the archers are now in a heavily obscured area, so all of you looking at them are effectively blinded. They have advantage on their attacks.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Cognomen's Cassowary, post: 6877538, member: 6801445"] Uh . . . no, I have not done that. I couched my conclusions in conditionals. I have been very careful not to proclaim any absolutes about the goodness or badness of the spell, and I have been clear that I am making generalizations. I have yet to use the word "objective" or its derivatives. I haven't even called what I have done "analysis." I have made my methodology plain so that anybody reading it can decide for him- or herself how applicable my conclusions are to his or her character and game, and I have said that there is no accounting for context and DM tendency. Yes, I said that ADHW will do more damage against seven or more enemies, though I don't understand why you continue to fixate on the numerical portion of my comparison. Yes, there are situations where ADHW is a (subjectively) better spell than chain lightning, as I have stated previously. There are, however, [I]more[/I] situations where chain lightning is (subjectively) better, and I consider that to make it better on the whole, and that's my point in making generalizations. Coming at this as a sorcerer player whose character does not have a thematic school, gains only one spell per level, and will never have more than fifteen total, I find those kinds of generalizations very helpful, since having the perfect spell for every job is not an option. As a general and subjective rule, I prefer the spell that will have more application in more situations, if only because I have not yet worked up the nerve to "objectively" select my spells by random roll. I use "to hit" as shorthand, since I am often talking about both ability scores and armor class. I can see where I've been inconsistent, so I will edit for clarity. If I confused you, I apologize. If you're just being peevish, I don't care. I think that that bolded portion is too quickly overlooked with 5e's (somewhat dodgy) vision rules. WIZARD: . . . so that's forty-five damage to all the archers who failed the save, and half to those who succeeded. That's the end of my turn. DM: All right, the archers are now in a heavily obscured area, so all of you looking at them are effectively blinded. They have advantage on their attacks. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is Abi-Dalzim's Horrid Wilting a good spell?
Top