Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lanefan" data-source="post: 7899974" data-attributes="member: 29398">Quite likely, though from 3e onward "additions to the Feats list" has been making a mighty push to catch up!Where the bloat comes from - and this gets right back to the original thread premise of the power of no - is that while DMs are always eager to add new spells they rarely if ever look to delete any.  But if a spell never gets cast*, or is of limited if any use if-when it does, why keep it in the game?  Why not say 'no'?* - including by the opposition; some spells are worth keeping just so the DM has them available even if the PCs never touch themYou mention...Were this my experience, next time I started a campaign that spell would be gone as clearly nobody would miss it.  And then I'd have room to add in a new spell idea that might see more action and may be more useful/fun/entertaining, without adding to the overall list bloat.In my current 1e-based game I've made all casters work like 3e Sorcerers, partly in hopes of seeing some obscure spells get cast more often; and while it's helped a bit there's still quite a few spells that never see the light of day.  So, for my next campaign, out will come the pruning shears... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>