Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Phelk" data-source="post: 1070305" data-attributes="member: 12149"><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f631.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":o" title="Eek!    :o"  data-smilie="9"data-shortname=":o" /> Actually, I hadn't done trials yet, I was busily still ironing out the text...BTW, the benefit of more than two participants would be a higher maximum mana level, as well as having a few buddies to 'feel your pain'... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />And thanks for the trial info, I think it proves what I was afraid of: the DCs may be too high.I'm thinking I either need to lower the DCs, or perhaps add some sort of additional benefit for having multiple participants, such as a +1 bonus on the caster level checks for each participants beyond the first... Still, even if I grant that +1 bonus, that's only going to give our intrepid mages a +1 bonus... Chances are, they're still going to fail and get blown up.I don't want to make these rituals too easy, of course. They do allow a spellcaster to cast a spell without knowning it, or indeed without even having access to it. Then again, I want it to be something that a spellcaster wouldn't have to be insane to even consider.Perhaps I'll play around with the DC a bit lower (say 6-9ish).Again, thanks for the trials, Cheiromancer, you've been increadibly helpful!</blockquote>

Verification