New tidbit about spells and hit points.

[GlassJaw]

I think that DnD (both PnP and on the computer) have become a little too cinematic and bordering campy.

Are you serious? I think just the opposite. The fact that the wizard has to pull out his crossbow when he's out of spells and there are very few, if any, options for dynamic maneuvers tell me the games needs more cinematic options.

 

[Sun Knight]

What's wrong with pulling out the crossbow? Its a decent weapon when you want to stay at range and have a low strength score. Sure, a wizard may run out of spells but is good wizard conserves his spells tell a really big fight when he needs them. You don't waste a magic missile on a kobold, you use hail of stones to catch and kill two to three kobolds.

Though some of those spells are a bit over powered. What we need is to give classes, may it be wizards, fighters, rogues, or whatever is more versitility but less uberness.

 

[frankthedm]

[IMaGel]http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/2271/wyrmglyphkl2.gif[/IMaGel]

I really hope it isn't a hardwired death spiral. I have a marked preference for D&D specifically because it doesn't have the death spiral.

And in my group there are some who hate that in D&D, beings have NO penalties from wounds until they are dropped.

 

[Zurai]

And -10 is a logical breaking point for being alive or dead?

No. But the poster I was quoting wanted to move the "can act" breakpoint to 10, which is just as illogical if not more so.

 

[Wormwood]

If you want to see how DnD has become more and more sterile and bland just compare 1e Tomb of Horrors to 3.5e's Heart of Nightfang Spire. 4e is going to be even worse.

Heart of Nightfang Spire may have its flaws, but are you seriously contending that Tomb of Horrors was anything other than a masturbatory joke?

There are more than a few 1e modules that showcase innovative design and engaging stories. Tomb of Horrors is NOT one of them.

 

[GlassJaw]

What's wrong with pulling out the crossbow?

Because it's not fun and not what the player playing the wizard wants to do.

Why not give the wizard an at-will 1d6 damage ranged touch attack energy blast? Much more cinematic and flavorful but doesn't break the rules and always gives the wizard something to do.

 

[Sun Knight]

Because it's not fun and not what the player playing the wizard wants to do.

Why not give the wizard an at-will 1d6 damage ranged touch attack energy blast? Much more cinematic and flavorful but doesn't break the rules and always gives the wizard something to do.

Eh, what?!?!?! Make them into a Warlock and give them full range of arcane spell power!?!?!

And you don't think that is overpowering them? Less cinematics, please. I don't want to run a campaign that makes the DnD movie oscar winning material.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Dice shouldn't kill PCs. They are the hero(in)es. Fantasy would suck out loud if Frodo . . . died because a mook rolled high and they rolled low.

They aren't heroes until they succeed. Frodo and Sam explicitly realized this. "Folk in those tales had plenty of chances to turn back, but they didn't." If they had turned back, or been slain, perhaps no tales would be told about them. And being slain by a "mook" makes you no less a hero. It is risking the perils of adventure that makes one a hero. Being somehow immune to "mooks" because of some "heroic aura" would be the height of boring in both fiction and adventure gaming.

I'm biting my tongue on how much better fantasy would be if Drizzt had been slain by a mook.

 

[Nine Hands]

Because it's not fun and not what the player playing the wizard wants to do.

Why not give the wizard an at-will 1d6 damage ranged touch attack energy blast? Much more cinematic and flavorful but doesn't break the rules and always gives the wizard something to do.

Exactly. This way you don't feel like a total loser when your spells run out. Its probably the biggest reason I never played wizards, the fighter goes all day long and the wizard, while powerful up front just fizzles out at some point in the game and is reduced to a lame crossbow (which most "typical" wizards do not use).

Give me cool, low powered spells I can sling nearly all day long and I'd be happy to leave the crossbow for use by the dwarf.

 

[Gentlegamer]

Because it's not fun and not what the player playing the wizard wants to do.

Why not give the wizard an at-will 1d6 damage ranged touch attack energy blast? Much more cinematic and flavorful but doesn't break the rules and always gives the wizard something to do.

I think if I see "not fun" one more time, I will scream . . .

Your assertion is premised on the wizard's role in adventuring to be one of combat prowess (via magic). I wholly disagree. Yes, the wizard has damaging spells, but that should never be the sole focus of his spell repertoire. There is much more utility in magic than "blasting foes." If a wizard expends all his magic resources in combat, then he should not be surprised that he is reduced to "pulling out a crossbow." In fact, this wizard ought to be multiclassed with Fighter since he seems to enjoy combat so very much.