Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="tetrasodium" data-source="post: 8824198" data-attributes="member: 93670">A GM drawing on past editions to bring back disjunction as a solution to one of 5e's problems came up earlier but that's not so simple. I've opened a session by casting the spell that must not be named on a PC and had things <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/ravenloft-horror-safety-tools.679760/post-8261784" target="_blank">go great</a> but have never seen disjunction go over well when it was part of the system.&nbsp; I've considered disjunction several times over the last 8 years or so &amp; can't see a bunch of players who never played those editions finding &quot;it used to be a spell but not in 5e&quot; making that pill any easier to swallow in the environment&nbsp; of 5e's &quot; magic items are completely optional wink wink nudge nudge&quot;.&nbsp; The fact that 3.x was will save &amp; 2e was save vrs spell&nbsp; is going to cause no end of gnashing of teeth or rules lawyering if Alice loses her magic doodad when neither of those cleanly map to 5e. What amounts to &quot;just use out of print past edition tools to fix 5e&quot; isn't exactly selling the idea that the situation is anything but a mess thrown at an unsupported gm to fix.&nbsp; The fact that 5e magic items are dramatically more powerful as well as fewer in number ensures that Alice are going to be even more upset when she loses her doodad but bob keeps his two or three.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="tetrasodium, post: 8824198, member: 93670"] A GM drawing on past editions to bring back disjunction as a solution to one of 5e's problems came up earlier but that's not so simple. I've [I]opened[/I] a session by casting the spell that must not be named on a PC [I]and[/I] had things [URL='https://www.enworld.org/threads/ravenloft-horror-safety-tools.679760/post-8261784']go [B]great[/B][/URL] but have never seen disjunction go over well when it was part of the system. I've considered disjunction several times over the last 8 years or so & can't see a bunch of players who never played those editions finding "[I]it used to be a spell but not in 5e[/I]" making that pill any easier to swallow in the environment of 5e's "[I] magic items are completely optional [I]wink[/I] [I]wink[/I] [I]nudge[/I] [I]nudge[/I][/I]". The fact that 3.x was will save & 2e was save vrs spell is going to cause no end of gnashing of teeth or rules lawyering if Alice loses her magic doodad when neither of those cleanly map to 5e. What amounts to "just use out of print past edition tools to fix 5e" isn't exactly selling the idea that the situation is anything but a mess thrown at an unsupported gm to fix. The fact that 5e magic items are dramatically more powerful as well as fewer in number ensures that Alice are going to be even more upset when she loses her doodad but bob keeps his two or three. [/QUOTE]

Verification