Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kinak" data-source="post: 6286190" data-attributes="member: 6694112">Bringing them all towards the middle is a much better solution if you can use it. I just know my players well enough to know bringing some classes down isn't on the table and I suspect that other GMs would run into the same pushback.Ironically, I could probably buff the non-casters and just eliminate wizard, cleric, druid, and summoner. But nerfing an existing class wouldn't fly. Psychology is an interesting beast.I agree this is a total mess, but both the 1e/2e and 3e progression are pretty weird in practice. Getting spells that hardly ever work isn't much better than getting spells that hardly ever fail.You could probably salvage the 1e/2e progression by ramping the number of saves, like low-level spells allow multiple saves before the worst happens, mid-level have one save, and high-level do something bad if you fail any of them. Like phantasmal killer and its kin.For my group, because we avoid save or suck stuff in general, many of those effects have been converted to ability damage with an extra effect on hitting 0. Lesser restoration has gotten a lot of mileage <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=":)" /> Other have been coded with &quot;outs&quot; like you can take some damage to ignore the effect for a round.Any of those, of course, require rewriting a ton of spells. Which comes back to player buy-in. I'm lucky on that front, because my players hate getting hit with save or suck spells way more than I hate my villains getting hit.Cheers!Kinak</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kinak, post: 6286190, member: 6694112"] Bringing them all towards the middle is a much better solution if you can use it. I just know my players well enough to know bringing some classes down isn't on the table and I suspect that other GMs would run into the same pushback. Ironically, I could probably buff the non-casters and just eliminate wizard, cleric, druid, and summoner. But nerfing an existing class wouldn't fly. Psychology is an interesting beast. I agree this is a total mess, but both the 1e/2e and 3e progression are pretty weird in practice. Getting spells that hardly ever work isn't much better than getting spells that hardly ever fail. You could probably salvage the 1e/2e progression by ramping the number of saves, like low-level spells allow multiple saves before the worst happens, mid-level have one save, and high-level do something bad if you fail any of them. Like phantasmal killer and its kin. For my group, because we avoid save or suck stuff in general, many of those effects have been converted to ability damage with an extra effect on hitting 0. Lesser restoration has gotten a lot of mileage :) Other have been coded with "outs" like you can take some damage to ignore the effect for a round. Any of those, of course, require rewriting a ton of spells. Which comes back to player buy-in. I'm lucky on that front, because my players hate getting hit with save or suck spells way more than I hate my villains getting hit. Cheers! Kinak [/QUOTE]

Verification