Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 6663208" data-attributes="member: 6787650">No, learning to use magic in 5E is hard, like learning to generate electricity. Learning a spell is easy, like downloading an app. Or at least, it's easy for wizards, since they're the ones who can do it in a few hours. For Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters it still takes a full level (which, admittedly, could still happen in only a day or so). Once you know the general technique (using magic of level X) the details (specific spell) are pretty easy. That is the 5E model anyway--in other systems like Ars Magica and Shadowrun learning a new spell could be considerably easier or harder.Check your assumptions.Second Wind isn't dissociated (the fighter is making an in-character choice to draw upon that reserve energy; it therefore may not be realistic or sensible but it isn't dissociated; it fails my non-Vancian criteria but not the associated criterion) but Lucky is, and I'm on record as disliking it and being tempted to ban it specifically because it is dissociated. I may not complain incessantly about it on the Internet but that doesn't mean I don't have complaints.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 6663208, member: 6787650"] No, learning to use magic in 5E is hard, like learning to generate electricity. Learning a [I]spell[/I] is easy, like downloading an app. Or at least, it's easy for wizards, since they're the ones who can do it in a few hours. For Eldritch Knights and Arcane Tricksters it still takes a full level (which, admittedly, could still happen in only a day or so). Once you know the general technique (using magic of level X) the details (specific spell) are pretty easy. That is the 5E model anyway--in other systems like Ars Magica and Shadowrun learning a new spell could be considerably easier or harder. [COLOR=#000000] Check your assumptions. Second Wind isn't dissociated (the fighter is making an in-character choice to draw upon that reserve energy; it therefore may not be [I]realistic[/I] or [I]sensible[/I] but it isn't dissociated; it fails my non-Vancian criteria but not the associated criterion) but Lucky is, and I'm on record as disliking it and being tempted to ban it specifically because it is dissociated. I may not complain incessantly about it on the Internet but that doesn't mean I don't have complaints.[/COLOR] [/QUOTE]

Verification