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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mike Sullivan" data-source="post: 828217" data-attributes="member: 9824">Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: limiting buff durationsNo, please don't.  You don't need to justify yourself to me.  But do consider this:You say that magic is supposed to be rare and mysterious in your world.  Check.  Makes sense to me.Okay, but this one guy now not only has a ton of magic-users around him, he's got them behaving like menials around him and behaving in non-mysterious manners.  Okay, sure.  I'm totally willing to believe that your campaign justifies that.But now, you say that because magic ought to be rare and mysterious, you want to nerf the magic that isn't rare or mysterious around this guy, so as to tone it back down a level.Can you see that you're fighting against yourself here?  You're folding back and forth in a way that seems uneccesary.  If you want this guy to have magic at his beck and call, let him have magic at his beck and call.  If you want magic to be mysterious and rare (universally or for this guy), then make it mysterious and rare.  Don't feel like you have to justify this to me -- I honestly don't care -- but do make sure in your own mind that what you're doing makes sense.Anyhow, I totally agree with Plane Sailing that it's an odd convention for spellcasters to cast spells on themselves at the beginning of the day for "buffs," and walk around enchanted all the time.  I can think of a couple of possible examples in fantasy literature that support the concept -- in "What Good Is a Glass Dagger," by Larry Niven, there's a fairly clear implication that the Warlock keeps himself permenantly surrounded by some defensive spells and prescience enchantements, and in the Deathgate Cycle by Weiss and Hickman, Haplo seems to be physically magically enhanced by his tattoos/runic magic.  But by and large, it's not a "normal" part of the genre.</blockquote>

Verification