Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8083638" data-attributes="member: 6987520">That isn't quite true IMO: it was just balanced in a different way. MUs were balanced more by being hard to keep alive and with very limiting spells at lower levels, but then stronger magic at higher levels made survival easier and allowed them to contribute much more over the course of a day.Well, it is useful as it isn't hard to imagine how you would implement the concept. As you say, bringing back timing is the big part. A very simple option would be having an initiative modifier equal to the spell level (or maybe twice the spell level). So, if you were casting Fireball and your initiative was a 16, you would be &quot;casting&quot; from 16 to 14 and the spell happens on 13 (double level would be 16-11, spell finishes on 10). If anyone hits you while casting (not on the finishing number though) you make a concentration check or your spell is gone. You really don't even have to bring weapon speeds back in, but all these types of things are already variants in the 5E DMG.Yeah, a lot of us played AD&amp;D (1E and/or 2E) for decades, myself included, and we always used casting times and speed factors (especially in 2E when the concept was simplified) because they made sense. We never found it slowing or complex (1E sometimes, but once you &quot;get it&quot; it isn't that bad...), but obviously YMDV. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />I respectfully disagree. It did work, and it was fun. Otherwise, we wouldn't have kept playing it for nearly 30 years. Even when 3E came out, we tried it, thought it was &quot;ok&quot; but a bit cumbersome with feats, etc. then, so kept playing our 1E/2E hybrid instead. Different strokes for different folks, though. shrug I know a group who really liked the change when it went to the d20 system, and personally I preferred the d20 Star Wars the most--I felt it fit better than in D&amp;D, for myself anyway...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 8083638, member: 6987520"] That isn't quite true IMO: it was just balanced in a different way. MUs were balanced more by being hard to keep alive and with very limiting spells at lower levels, but then stronger magic at higher levels made survival easier and allowed them to contribute much more over the course of a day. Well, it is useful as it isn't hard to imagine how you would implement the concept. As you say, bringing back timing is the big part. A very simple option would be having an initiative modifier equal to the spell level (or maybe twice the spell level). So, if you were casting Fireball and your initiative was a 16, you would be "casting" from 16 to 14 and the spell happens on 13 (double level would be 16-11, spell finishes on 10). If anyone hits you while casting (not on the finishing number though) you make a concentration check or your spell is gone. You really don't even have to bring weapon speeds back in, but all these types of things are already variants in the 5E DMG. Yeah, a lot of us played AD&D (1E and/or 2E) for decades, myself included, and we [I]always[/I] used casting times and speed factors (especially in 2E when the concept was simplified) because they made sense. We never found it slowing or complex (1E sometimes, but once you "get it" it isn't that bad...), but obviously YMDV. :) I respectfully disagree. It did work, and it was fun. Otherwise, we wouldn't have kept playing it for nearly 30 years. Even when 3E came out, we tried it, thought it was "ok" but a bit cumbersome with feats, etc. then, so kept playing our 1E/2E hybrid instead. Different strokes for different folks, though. [I]shrug[/I] I know a group who really liked the change when it went to the d20 system, and personally I preferred the d20 Star Wars the most--I felt it fit better than in D&D, for myself anyway... [/QUOTE]

Verification