Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="satori01" data-source="post: 5909363" data-attributes="member: 7859">I hate the idea of spell casting as being dangerous.  Realistically, whenever anyone takes a sword wound to their body, there should be a chance they lose their next action...why should a trained Fighter, or Trained Cleric have no penalties while a trained Wizard does?Thematically it might seem a good idea, but only if spell slotted magic is way more powerful than other actions, (to justify the theme)...and this can be hard to do.Concentration checks in 3E quickly became hand waivable, as all spell casters took max ranks.Moreover should spell failure apply to all casters?  I always thought Spell Failure for Arcane casters but not Divine was clunky.Core rules I say leave it out, but haves module for those that want it.As for Mearls buff spell comments, the issue with buff spells being overpowered has never been zero going to hero, but more subpar going to supreme....ala the Cleric casting Divine Might, Bless, Holy Weapon on themselves.I hav seen a party from the safety of a Rope Trick buff a partymate with everything they got, and send them out alone....funny but ultimately also unbalancing.I don't like, in general, rules that threaten to break verisimilitude, but I would not mind a rule that stated 1 buff on a PC at a time.  Period.You want Divine Might or you want Haste, 'cause you can not have both.</blockquote>