Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Saeviomagy" data-source="post: 4856572" data-attributes="member: 5890">This doesn't actually make much sense. It basically starts out &quot;Realistically, when you cast a spell...&quot;, which I think we can all agree is nonsense.When you're talking about magic, the only real thing one can do is judge balance and game terms.Most of the weapon-implement crossovers seem fairly reasonable. +1 to hit vs targets when you have CA? So what?It's only when you get to biggies, like daggermaster's 18-20 crit range that things become unreasonable. And even then, it's not that bad compared with, say, a daggermaster who invests heavily into the rogue blast and burst powers.Note: I'm not saying that it's a bad thing that your DM made the ruling, merely that he attempts to justify it with an argument about realism: he's well within his rights to say &quot;this is the rule because to rule otherwise is bad for the game&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Saeviomagy, post: 4856572, member: 5890"] This doesn't actually make much sense. It basically starts out "Realistically, when you cast a spell...", which I think we can all agree is nonsense. When you're talking about magic, the only real thing one can do is judge balance and game terms. Most of the weapon-implement crossovers seem fairly reasonable. +1 to hit vs targets when you have CA? So what? It's only when you get to biggies, like daggermaster's 18-20 crit range that things become unreasonable. And even then, it's not that bad compared with, say, a daggermaster who invests heavily into the rogue blast and burst powers. Note: I'm not saying that it's a bad thing that your DM made the ruling, merely that he attempts to justify it with an argument about realism: he's well within his rights to say "this is the rule because to rule otherwise is bad for the game". [/QUOTE]

Verification