Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Merlin the Tuna" data-source="post: 3905826" data-attributes="member: 55638">This is particularly apt given that the feat's effects aren't anything like 3.5's Shape Spell, instead being more akin to Extraordinary Spell Aim (which also won't work as a feat name now that Spells involve attack rolls, or whatever we end up calling them).&nbsp; It brings back shades of some of Monte Cook's complaints with the 3.5 revision in general -- that things are similar enough to think you know what they mean, but not enough to actually be confident that you're right.I mean, I'm not a huge fan of Golden Wyvern either, but this certainly isn't a sparkling alternative, and when you say you're taking Shape Spell for your feat, I'm still going to ask you what it does anyway.Edit: Wait a second, does 3.5 have a Shape Spell?&nbsp; It's not in the SRD... it's it CArc material?&nbsp; Maybe I'm thinking of Sculpt Spell.&nbsp; The point pretty much stands either way, though.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Merlin the Tuna, post: 3905826, member: 55638"] This is particularly apt given that the feat's effects aren't anything like 3.5's Shape Spell, instead being more akin to Extraordinary Spell Aim (which also won't work as a feat name now that Spells involve attack rolls, or whatever we end up calling them). It brings back shades of some of Monte Cook's complaints with the 3.5 revision in general -- that things are similar enough to [i]think[/i] you know what they mean, but not enough to actually be confident that you're right. I mean, I'm not a huge fan of Golden Wyvern either, but this certainly isn't a sparkling alternative, and when you say you're taking Shape Spell for your feat, I'm still going to ask you what it does anyway. [b]Edit:[/b] Wait a second, does 3.5 have a Shape Spell? It's not in the SRD... it's it CArc material? Maybe I'm thinking of Sculpt Spell. The point pretty much stands either way, though. [/QUOTE]

Verification