Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 2522216" data-attributes="member: 2525">I totally disagree.  You assume the second category is the game mechanic and the first is not. WHY?  If shadow material is "real", then why not look at the demage reducing stuff as being the game mechanic?  Particularly since it's quite vague as to what "hit points" really represent (is it your luck?  Is it part dodging? Is it wearing people down? Is it actual injuries? Why would a higher level character be able to take 100 times more injuries than a lower level character?), I'd say it's more likely that the "game mechanic" part is the stuff dealing with hit point numbers that are unseen by the PC, and the "chance to be completely real" is the more likely perspective of a character.Your character does know that something truly real comes out of it.  They have specialized in knowing just that.  It's what a shadow caster is all about...actually pulling real shadow material into the prime material plane to infuse their illusion spells.  Sometimes it works for them, and sometimes it does not.  But, I don't think the perspective is "it's only 20% real" for the character.  It's all real if it works...they just are not always as sucessful as they would like to be at doing it, and are working to get better with experience.In fact, don't you think it's metagaming that a character know a precise percentage at all?I don't think working towards getting shadow spells to be 100% real "breaks" any mechanic (and I think that term "broken" is thrown around with far too much ease sometimes).  To do it you have to devote your entire character concept to that goal, and the end result is just more flexibility in the spells you can cast at the expense of pretty much any other feats or abilities.  You could become just as flexible probably using a generalized wizard devoted to the concept of spell flexibility...this is just a different way to reach that same goal.  If you think it's broken, I'd love to see some examples compared to equivelent levels of generalist wizards devoted to the spell-flexibility concept.</blockquote>

Verification