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="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 4781723" data-attributes="member: 19675">That was whom I was "invoking."<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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Actually, yes- sorry I wasn't clear.The handicap would be most pronounced at lower levels, obviously.  A high level caster would still be able to deal out tremendous damage to a wide variety of opponents even if he could only cast a spell every other round.Part of the suggestion was to extend the "sweet spot" for playing non-casters into higher levels, as well as getting away from the "I magic that" problem that some high-level campaigns seem to suffer from.I think that it would depend- on a certain level, I don't see this as appreciably different from "Low Magic" campaigns.  Instead of reducing the levels available, "Slow Magic" limits how much magic can be launched in a given time frame.  In a "Low Magic" campaign, "Wish" is probably not allowed.  In a "Slow Magic" campaign, its available, but it may take a while to be fulfilled...It occurs to me that this would also make classic "caster toys" like rings, wands, staves and wands more important.  MUCH more.I agree that this is a serious concern.  However, I'm not sure how serious.  I know its just a statistical aberration, but I haven't seen a but a handful of spells successfully interrupted in all the years 3Ed/3.XEd have been around.Unfortunately, I don't have the statistical chops to do a meaningful analysis of the problem.I admit this could also be a serious problem, but again, one that depends upon the players themselves.  Someone who is a fan of "Low Magic" type campaigns might find this interesting.Interesting!When using that, did you note any of the problems the others have pointed out?</blockquote>

Verification