Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Our 5 Session Playtest
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Connorsrpg" data-source="post: 5943686" data-attributes="member: 19265"><p><strong>Magic Missile...again</strong></p><p></p><p>I played the old editions when MM auto hit and it was OK, b/c it was a very limited resource. In our 4E game, it NEVER went back to auto-hit. We always rolled.</p><p></p><p>As stated, I was okay to leave it, but the players wanted to change to rolling, so I let them choose. But, as the game progressed and it was used over and over in situations where it should be very difficult to hit things, we just didn't like it at all.</p><p></p><p>I could deal with auto-hit if it was a limited resource or only auto-hits under favourable circumstances, but combined with other spells or in situations like our final fight it just seemed so, unheroic. The boss could do nothing (and I certainly didn't want him to hide away out of sight).</p><p></p><p>I also agree its damage could go up if to hit rolls are required. I would much rather do away with the d4+1 tradition than stick to the auto-hit one.</p><p></p><p>But, again, we played it as written to start, and in our 5 sessions there were so many times when we said things like, "Oh, I don't think you would get a clear shot; at best it would be disadvantage with a chance of hitting allies...oh, yeah, MM. You hit". I have no particular like for the spell in general anyway, but my comments were based purely on the playtest, and yes, it was the one thing that 'spoiled our play experience'. I won't say ruined, b/c when 1 spell was our bone of contention...well that is a good thing I guess. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>I can only comment on what happened...and we did not like it. (Players included - and there were 3 of them that could use it. Our halfling wizard preferred other options simlpy b/c he thought MM lame).</p><p></p><p>If this brought up so many "I don't like it" moments in 5 sessions, I would hate to see what it could do over a whole campaign (especially where exploration is important). Better hunting than a ranger, best fisherman too (if it goes into water), snapping the rope of hanging PC or a chandelier, does it shoot through things like curtains/glass, knock/smash things being held, used by prone, drunk <em>greased</em> caster vs hidden target fighting on other side of allies, etc. All pretty cool for one-off heroic actions, but to be able to do them all the time, with NO chance of failure - sorry, but that is not our play style.</p><p></p><p>Oh, and [MENTION=6689976]KesselZero[/MENTION], a handout on how to play should NOT have to have a "long discussion" on how to account for one spell in play. That to me already says the spell is the problem.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Connorsrpg, post: 5943686, member: 19265"] [b]Magic Missile...again[/b] I played the old editions when MM auto hit and it was OK, b/c it was a very limited resource. In our 4E game, it NEVER went back to auto-hit. We always rolled. As stated, I was okay to leave it, but the players wanted to change to rolling, so I let them choose. But, as the game progressed and it was used over and over in situations where it should be very difficult to hit things, we just didn't like it at all. I could deal with auto-hit if it was a limited resource or only auto-hits under favourable circumstances, but combined with other spells or in situations like our final fight it just seemed so, unheroic. The boss could do nothing (and I certainly didn't want him to hide away out of sight). I also agree its damage could go up if to hit rolls are required. I would much rather do away with the d4+1 tradition than stick to the auto-hit one. But, again, we played it as written to start, and in our 5 sessions there were so many times when we said things like, "Oh, I don't think you would get a clear shot; at best it would be disadvantage with a chance of hitting allies...oh, yeah, MM. You hit". I have no particular like for the spell in general anyway, but my comments were based purely on the playtest, and yes, it was the one thing that 'spoiled our play experience'. I won't say ruined, b/c when 1 spell was our bone of contention...well that is a good thing I guess. :) I can only comment on what happened...and we did not like it. (Players included - and there were 3 of them that could use it. Our halfling wizard preferred other options simlpy b/c he thought MM lame). If this brought up so many "I don't like it" moments in 5 sessions, I would hate to see what it could do over a whole campaign (especially where exploration is important). Better hunting than a ranger, best fisherman too (if it goes into water), snapping the rope of hanging PC or a chandelier, does it shoot through things like curtains/glass, knock/smash things being held, used by prone, drunk [I]greased[/I] caster vs hidden target fighting on other side of allies, etc. All pretty cool for one-off heroic actions, but to be able to do them all the time, with NO chance of failure - sorry, but that is not our play style. Oh, and [MENTION=6689976]KesselZero[/MENTION], a handout on how to play should NOT have to have a "long discussion" on how to account for one spell in play. That to me already says the spell is the problem. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Our 5 Session Playtest
Top