Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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 stoneskin underpowered?
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="AaronOfBarbaria" data-source="post: 6714397" data-attributes="member: 6701872"><p>Something is wrong. The question is <em>what?</em>.</p><p></p><p>Is it that the player's expectation of the spell doesn't match up to what is reasonable to expect of the spell because that player is carrying expectations that match how some prior edition worked? Seems likely to me, considering that I've never seen a ranger cast hunter's mark and not keep it at least the rest of the encounter.</p><p></p><p>There is a reason that the spell has a range of 90 feet instead of 5 feet or touch. It matches pretty well to what sort of weapons hunters tend to prefer to use too.</p><p></p><p>Yet some folks expect to throw on a long range spell named for an activity that typically centers on the use of ranged weaponry, and put their character intentionally in a position more likely to be attacked and more likely to be hit, and not have that be a lot harder to get to work than going the route that one might expect to use the spell if 5th edition is their first edition: at range, with a ranged weapon, and keeping as much cover as you can against enemy attacks that do happen to come your way instead of someone else's.</p><p></p><p>Or, if the person really wants to be in melee and use that spell, they can invest in the available means of improving their chances. It is strange for some, but it is a truth of 5th edition that if you are planning on using Concentration spells as a big part of your character's "stuff I feel cool for doing" then Constitution is your #1 priority ability score-wise, not whatever you use for attack rolls, and not even whatever you use for spell attack rolls and save DCs.</p><p></p><p>It's different from prior editions, sure... but if the game can't be different from what you are used to, why would you choose to change editions?</p><p></p><p></p><p>I have spellcasters in all of my campaigns that I've run in 5th edition. They all make choices to reduce their chances of taking damage, especially when using a concentration spell, and have all made choices to either acknowledge that concentration is a priority and improve their chances of success by the means they have available, or to acknowledge that concentration isn't their thing and choose spell options that don't include many that need concentration (I think one character might have only detect magic as a concentration spell) and be no worse of a character for doing so - including one that is a ranger and has decided he prefers using his spell slots on <em>cure wounds</em> and <em>lesser restoration</em> so that the cleric he is partied with can afford more spell slots for <em>inflict wounds</em>.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="AaronOfBarbaria, post: 6714397, member: 6701872"] Something is wrong. The question is [I]what?[/I]. Is it that the player's expectation of the spell doesn't match up to what is reasonable to expect of the spell because that player is carrying expectations that match how some prior edition worked? Seems likely to me, considering that I've never seen a ranger cast hunter's mark and not keep it at least the rest of the encounter. There is a reason that the spell has a range of 90 feet instead of 5 feet or touch. It matches pretty well to what sort of weapons hunters tend to prefer to use too. Yet some folks expect to throw on a long range spell named for an activity that typically centers on the use of ranged weaponry, and put their character intentionally in a position more likely to be attacked and more likely to be hit, and not have that be a lot harder to get to work than going the route that one might expect to use the spell if 5th edition is their first edition: at range, with a ranged weapon, and keeping as much cover as you can against enemy attacks that do happen to come your way instead of someone else's. Or, if the person really wants to be in melee and use that spell, they can invest in the available means of improving their chances. It is strange for some, but it is a truth of 5th edition that if you are planning on using Concentration spells as a big part of your character's "stuff I feel cool for doing" then Constitution is your #1 priority ability score-wise, not whatever you use for attack rolls, and not even whatever you use for spell attack rolls and save DCs. It's different from prior editions, sure... but if the game can't be different from what you are used to, why would you choose to change editions? I have spellcasters in all of my campaigns that I've run in 5th edition. They all make choices to reduce their chances of taking damage, especially when using a concentration spell, and have all made choices to either acknowledge that concentration is a priority and improve their chances of success by the means they have available, or to acknowledge that concentration isn't their thing and choose spell options that don't include many that need concentration (I think one character might have only detect magic as a concentration spell) and be no worse of a character for doing so - including one that is a ranger and has decided he prefers using his spell slots on [I]cure wounds[/I] and [I]lesser restoration[/I] so that the cleric he is partied with can afford more spell slots for [I]inflict wounds[/I]. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is stoneskin underpowered?
Top