Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AaronOfBarbaria" data-source="post: 6715093" data-attributes="member: 6701872">In some campaigns, yes, but not all.Not every spell is meant to have equal applicability regardless of the actual campaign at hand. In fact, most are obviously meant not to since spells aren't all written with different effects depending on which &quot;pillars&quot; of gameplay are being focused on (i.e. fireball is for combat, might be useful for exploration, and isn't going to help interaction much, and something like charm person is not a great combat choice, doesn't do much for exploration, but is very helpful for interaction, and so on).Which you can choose...how hard can it be to predict that you will take fire damage if you are about to go fight the fire cult in PotA?&nbsp; You are right...they are not equal. PfE is lower level and has no cost and as you go up in levels it becomes more useful because more and more creatures are doing damage that it can affect.Every character can contribute.&nbsp; Do some damage, you've contributed.&nbsp; That's the point of the cap.&nbsp; A typical party of even 5th level PCs can easily do 40 damage in a single round.&nbsp; A 4th level spell to avoid damage for one round sounds like a cool spell...cool enough to warrant that 100gp cost.I'm just replacing the type with a cap to make the spell more broadly useful but setting the cap low enough that it can be easily overcome (and the cap is certainly adjustable...5hp/slot level?) As is resistance or immunity.&nbsp; A typical character (PC or NPC) in our game can do at least half the cap in damage without breaking a sweat. Please explain why negating damage from one or two characters' attacks (at a cost of 100 gp) makes it hands down the best buff spell evah.&nbsp; Oh...and it's still a concentration spell...so if it is cast on an ally concentration cam still be broken.&nbsp; It would make it the one concentration buff spell that is better to cast on yourself than an ally.&nbsp; Again...justifying that 100 gp cost.</blockquote>[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE="AaronOfBarbaria, post: 6715093, member: 6701872"] In [I]some[/I] campaigns, yes, but not all. Not every spell is meant to have equal applicability regardless of the actual campaign at hand. In fact, most are obviously meant not to since spells aren't all written with different effects depending on which "pillars" of gameplay are being focused on (i.e. [I]fireball[/I] is for combat, might be useful for exploration, and isn't going to help interaction much, and something like [I]charm person[/I] is not a great combat choice, doesn't do much for exploration, but is very helpful for interaction, and so on). Which you can choose...how hard can it be to predict that you will take fire damage if you are about to go fight the fire cult in PotA? You are right...they are not equal. PfE is lower level and has no cost and as you go up in levels it becomes more useful because more and more creatures are doing damage that it can affect. Every character can contribute. Do some damage, you've contributed. That's the point of the cap. A typical party of even 5th level PCs can easily do 40 damage in a single round. A 4th level spell to avoid damage for one round sounds like a cool spell...cool enough to warrant that 100gp cost. I'm just replacing the type with a cap to make the spell more broadly useful but setting the cap low enough that it can be easily overcome (and the cap is certainly adjustable...5hp/slot level?) As is resistance or immunity. A typical character (PC or NPC) in our game can do at least half the cap in damage without breaking a sweat. Please explain why negating damage from one or two characters' attacks (at a cost of 100 gp) makes it hands down the best buff spell evah. Oh...and it's still a concentration spell...so if it is cast on an ally concentration cam still be broken. It would make it the one concentration buff spell that is better to cast on yourself than an ally. Again...justifying that 100 gp cost.[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]

Verification