Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imagicka" data-source="post: 3191432" data-attributes="member: 4621">Mmm... Holy Beef... Yeah, G.R. pretty much laid it all out here.&nbsp; You can get by with up to light or medium armor, to cast spells with little or no spell failure.&nbsp; However, to me there shouldn't really be a reason why someone who is a dedicated wizard would have to wear armour.&nbsp; But logically, I don't see a lot of reason why wizards and sorcerers should be nerfed.&nbsp; I think wizards are nerfed enough as it is because they can't cast like a sorcerer, and have to prepare spells.&nbsp; -- I much more like the idea that wizards should be allowed to cast anything from their repertoire, and then giving sorcerers a little something extra as well. Personally, in my game, arcane spell failure is more a product of interference with metal, namely iron.&nbsp; Somatic interference does play a part (in the case of padded and leather), as well as all the other types of armour.&nbsp; Then 3.0 came out.&nbsp; When I read the Still Spell feat, it gave me pause.But tell me this... what is it that a Bard learns so that he doesn't have any arcane spell failure, that the wizard cannot learn?&nbsp; Why should you have to become a bard?&nbsp; Why not just learn that one thing hat bards learn that allows someone to be able to cast in light armour without having a chance of failure?&nbsp; I don't know why no one ever created feats address this problem.&nbsp; Perhaps a chain of feats that allows someone to cast is light, then medium, and eventually heavy armour. That's what my players thought, until I pulled out all the stops on what I thought kobolds should be.&nbsp; I've never read Tucker's Kobolds, but I imagine that my kommando kobolds are pretty similar.&nbsp; -- But I also think that shield ACs aren't high enough either.&nbsp; But there needs to be a certain amount of 'realism' in any game system.&nbsp; If there wasn't, how do you determine what happens when someone falls from a great height?&nbsp; How do you judicate fights?&nbsp; How can you even describe the fantastic/fantasy?Ahh, but we are talking about TV and literature.&nbsp; Where the most important aspect of either (especially TV and movies) is to make it visually appealing.&nbsp; Sure, you can argue that you don't need realism in a roleplaying game or fantasy fiction... Because you NEED those chainmail bikinis.&nbsp; But if you throw out the baseline of 'normal and common', the fantasy and the heroic are treated as being common and normal.&nbsp; This becomes your new baseline.&nbsp; Without that harsh level of reality you cannot begin to define where the fantastic lies.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imagicka, post: 3191432, member: 4621"] Mmm... Holy Beef... Yeah, G.R. pretty much laid it all out here. You can get by with up to light or medium armor, to cast spells with little or no spell failure. However, to me there shouldn't really be a reason why someone who is a dedicated wizard would have to wear armour. But logically, I don't see a lot of reason why wizards and sorcerers should be nerfed. I think wizards are nerfed enough as it is because they can't cast like a sorcerer, and have to prepare spells. -- I much more like the idea that wizards should be allowed to cast anything from their repertoire, and then giving sorcerers a little something extra as well. Personally, in my game, arcane spell failure is more a product of interference with metal, namely iron. Somatic interference does play a part (in the case of padded and leather), as well as all the other types of armour. Then 3.0 came out. When I read the Still Spell feat, it gave me pause. But tell me this... what is it that a Bard learns so that he doesn't have any arcane spell failure, that the wizard cannot learn? Why should you have to become a bard? Why not just learn that one thing hat bards learn that allows someone to be able to cast in light armour without having a chance of failure? I don't know why no one ever created feats address this problem. Perhaps a chain of feats that allows someone to cast is light, then medium, and eventually heavy armour. That's what my players thought, until I pulled out all the stops on what I thought kobolds should be. I've never read Tucker's Kobolds, but I imagine that my kommando kobolds are pretty similar. -- But I also think that shield ACs aren't high enough either. But there needs to be a certain amount of 'realism' in any game system. If there wasn't, how do you determine what happens when someone falls from a great height? How do you judicate fights? How can you even describe the fantastic/fantasy? Ahh, but we are talking about TV and literature. Where the most important aspect of either (especially TV and movies) is to make it visually appealing. Sure, you can argue that you don't need realism in a roleplaying game or fantasy fiction... Because you NEED those chainmail bikinis. But if you throw out the baseline of 'normal and common', the fantasy and the heroic are treated as being common and normal. This becomes your new baseline. Without that harsh level of reality you cannot begin to define where the fantastic lies. [/QUOTE]

Verification