Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GMMichael" data-source="post: 6291926" data-attributes="member: 6685730">Good question.&nbsp; I'll assume it's rhetorical, and add another:Why should a skilled swordfighter have a 1 to 20 range of bonuses to add to his attack bonus?I am completely and blissfully unaware of most things in 4e.You're right.&nbsp; Story-wise.&nbsp; But regarding the mechanics or rules, a player just says &quot;I want to play a wizard,&quot; and poof!&nbsp; He can cast a bunch of spells, without fail.&nbsp; Also, it feels overlooked to me, but there's only one rule (3e) that prevents Joseph the farmer from casting Fireball.&nbsp; (INT limit)My point was that something like spellcasting seems much more complicated than club-swinging, and therefore should require something (a roll?) to determine success.Actually, yes.&nbsp; The armor class rules assume that a PC always rolls 10 on his defense check.You're right.&nbsp; Rolling 1s sucks.&nbsp; Here's how magic could work (but won't in 5e):A high-level wizard casts a spell on multiple low-level creatures.- Casting spells is a skill.&nbsp; So the wizard makes a cast spell check.- The wizard can take 10 on his check if he wants to avoid a natural 1.&nbsp; Or 2.&nbsp; Or...- The wizard's result is the spell DC.- Avoiding spells is a skill.&nbsp; So the low-level creatures make spell-avoiding checks (saves).- The low-level creatures can take 10 as well, if the GM thinks it's appropriate.If the encounter isn't important, or the wizard is epic, or the GM wants to save time, or whatever, the GM can just take 10.&nbsp; The high-level caster succeeds, and well he should.&nbsp; If both sides take 10, but the caster's margin of success is small, the GM can decide that one or more creatures avoid the spell.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GMMichael, post: 6291926, member: 6685730"] Good question. I'll assume it's rhetorical, and add another: Why should a skilled swordfighter have a 1 to 20 range of bonuses to add to his attack bonus? I am completely and blissfully unaware of most things in 4e. You're right. Story-wise. But regarding the mechanics or rules, a player just says "I want to play a wizard," and poof! He can cast a bunch of spells, without fail. Also, it feels overlooked to me, but there's only one rule (3e) that prevents Joseph the farmer from casting Fireball. (INT limit) My point was that something like spellcasting seems much more complicated than club-swinging, and therefore should require something (a roll?) to determine success. Actually, yes. The armor class rules assume that a PC always rolls 10 on his defense check. You're right. Rolling 1s sucks. Here's how magic could work (but won't in 5e): A high-level wizard casts a spell on multiple low-level creatures. - Casting spells is a skill. So the wizard makes a cast spell check. - The wizard can take 10 on his check if he wants to avoid a natural 1. Or 2. Or... - The wizard's result is the spell DC. - Avoiding spells is a skill. So the low-level creatures make spell-avoiding checks (saves). - The low-level creatures can take 10 as well, if the GM thinks it's appropriate. If the encounter isn't important, or the wizard is epic, or the GM wants to save time, or whatever, the GM can just take 10. The high-level caster succeeds, and well he should. If both sides take 10, but the caster's margin of success is small, the GM can decide that one or more creatures avoid the spell. [/QUOTE]

Verification