Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Rituals Designs
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="marelion" data-source="post: 5749635" data-attributes="member: 6679828"><p>Please compare the following two passages and tell me what you think of them. Below my interpretation:</p><p></p><p><em>Fourth, we wanted to make sure that spells that existed to enable exploration (such as knock, water breathing, or </em><em>passwall—3e's "scroll bait" spells) no longer had to compete with more combat-useful utility effects.</em></p><p></p><p>So what Mr baker is implying is that in 3.x spells that are now riutuals had a hard time competing with combat spells. I guess, he has a point here and I can see why 4E sorted those spells out into the seperate category we now know as rituals. It was a design goal to encourage players to use rituals more frequently. What gives me a headache are the following two lines:</p><p></p><p><em>When you see 4E groups using rituals frequently, it's usually because they've found ways to exploit low-level rituals that have negligible costs.</em></p><p></p><p><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused :confused:" data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused :confused:" data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f615.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":confused:" title="Confused :confused:" data-smilie="5"data-shortname=":confused:" />So when a 4E group adapts to the new system and begins to use rituals more frequently it is a failure of the new design,which main selling point, I will emphasize this once more, was to encourage players to more frequently use them. </p><p></p><p>Am I the only one who is a little confused about this statement? It would have been helpful for the reader if Mr Baker had added a couple of examples of exploitable rituals.</p><p></p><p>I yet have to find an exploitable ritual. Might somebody enlighten me on the matter of ritual exploit? From what i have read on the internet the reverse seems to be true, e.g. that many groups forgo the use of rituals entirely because they feel wonky and of limited utility.</p><p></p><p>I`ll add that in our group (Level 15) we frequently use rituals, especially <em>Phantom Steed</em> and <em>Sending</em>, because they offer great utility. They both save a lot of story-time and help to create a larger frame for a Paragon Tier campaign. Removing messenger duties and travel issues feels perfectly right for heroes who are up to save entire continents from dragon invasions and the like. But bt, I honestly wonder how this could turn out to be a balance issue.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="marelion, post: 5749635, member: 6679828"] Please compare the following two passages and tell me what you think of them. Below my interpretation: [I]Fourth, we wanted to make sure that spells that existed to enable exploration (such as knock, water breathing, or [/I][I]passwall—3e's "scroll bait" spells) no longer had to compete with more combat-useful utility effects.[/I] So what Mr baker is implying is that in 3.x spells that are now riutuals had a hard time competing with combat spells. I guess, he has a point here and I can see why 4E sorted those spells out into the seperate category we now know as rituals. It was a design goal to encourage players to use rituals more frequently. What gives me a headache are the following two lines: [I]When you see 4E groups using rituals frequently, it's usually because they've found ways to exploit low-level rituals that have negligible costs.[/I] :confused::confused::confused:So when a 4E group adapts to the new system and begins to use rituals more frequently it is a failure of the new design,which main selling point, I will emphasize this once more, was to encourage players to more frequently use them. Am I the only one who is a little confused about this statement? It would have been helpful for the reader if Mr Baker had added a couple of examples of exploitable rituals. I yet have to find an exploitable ritual. Might somebody enlighten me on the matter of ritual exploit? From what i have read on the internet the reverse seems to be true, e.g. that many groups forgo the use of rituals entirely because they feel wonky and of limited utility. I`ll add that in our group (Level 15) we frequently use rituals, especially [I]Phantom Steed[/I] and [I]Sending[/I], because they offer great utility. They both save a lot of story-time and help to create a larger frame for a Paragon Tier campaign. Removing messenger duties and travel issues feels perfectly right for heroes who are up to save entire continents from dragon invasions and the like. But bt, I honestly wonder how this could turn out to be a balance issue. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Rituals Designs
Top