SableWyvern
Hero
hong said:Sensical is not a word.
Actually it is, although "sensible" has pretty much taken over entirely in common useage.
hong said:Sensical is not a word.
Delgar said:Well in your campaign you can just limit it to arcane and divine casters. That make you feel better?
The same is true for 3E/3.5E.GnomeWorks said:Can it work, is it neat? Sure. But it's not appropriate for all interpretations of magic.
GnomeWorks said:Were you not making the point that 3e casters were not the best-suited folk for making magic arms and armor?
If not, well, perhaps you may want to work on your communication skills, and stop being so annoyingly obtuse, so as to better engender intelligent conversation.
Lord Tirian said:I mean... all dwarven mastersmiths are spellcasters or their fabled weapons are just giving you +1 to attack rolls? What?
hong said:I was making the point that if you are trying to simulate 3E, nothing beats 3E. But simulating 3E is not the be all and end all of s*mul*tionism.
Break out of your paradigm.
Basically, because it's more or less the only fantasy data point I have, where spellcasters are *required* to create any magical item!GnomeWorks said:...I don't see why we're suddenly comparing 3.5 and 4e.
GnomeWorks said:Were you not making the point that 3e casters were not the best-suited folk for making magic arms and armor?