Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="AbdulAlhazred" data-source="post: 5919550" data-attributes="member: 82106">AD&D is definitely rather disorganized and confusing, 1e particularly, but 2e isn't exactly clear and concise either. The whole Stoneskin debate is getting somewhat crazy. Stoneskin wasn't even a core spell in 1e at all. It was introduced in UA, where it stops one entire attack routine etc. It became a core spell in 2e like many UA spells and as with most of them was heavily rewritten to stop 1d4+1/2 levels attacks (not attack routines). Depending on what you were fighting the later version was generally better. As a 4th level spell the UA version wasn't really worth bothering with. So it really depends on what rules you're using. The point stands though, a bare-arsed 12th level wizard without backup, with no spells active, and no items that will let him avoid an attack or quickly and safely withdraw is asking for it to the degree that he's not really anything close to a level 12 threat. It is a very specific (and IMHO rather odd and hard to account) situation. It certainly doesn't prove anything beyond if you put even a high level NPC in a bad situation they're hosed. A naked 12th level fighter without any henchmen or even a weapon would be an analogous situation and equally hopeless (sure, said NPC would have something like 50 hit points, but with AC 10 he'd be lucky to survive 2 rounds). Likewise if you want to put this kind of situation in 4e you are easily able to do so. It isn't the expected sort of scenario though. You could make the NPC a low level elite/solo or just give him bad defenses in the 'I am not at all prepared' vein. In either system this kind of thing is a DM setup, there's no reason to consider it to be 'better rules' that you can make an NPC that is STORY important but combat ineffective.</blockquote>

Verification