Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BobTheNob" data-source="post: 5945811" data-attributes="member: 82425">Quite the opposite. Its actually more for a non-combatant style caster.What the? You sayRead the description. It allows you to turn spells into damage, how is that for a non-combatent?Lets face it, if you have fireball doing Xd6 to all enemies in an area, are you going to convert it to a single damage spell which actually does less? Hell no. The way myth and magic is organised, you would NEVER convert damage spells into eldritch blasts.So which would you convert? Simple. Non combat spells. What this ability allows is for a mage to stock up on nothing but exploration spells and make him a utility master, then is a fight breaks out he can start converting them into eldritch blasts to avoid being completely useless.So to me, a &quot;sorceror&quot; is better off just using the combat spells that are there and stearing completely clear of this idea.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BobTheNob, post: 5945811, member: 82425"] Quite the opposite. Its actually more for a non-combatant style caster. What the? You say Read the description. It allows you to turn spells into damage, how is that for a non-combatent? Lets face it, if you have fireball doing Xd6 to all enemies in an area, are you going to convert it to a single damage spell which actually does less? Hell no. The way myth and magic is organised, you would NEVER convert damage spells into eldritch blasts. So which would you convert? Simple. Non combat spells. What this ability allows is for a mage to stock up on nothing but exploration spells and make him a utility master, then is a fight breaks out he can start converting them into eldritch blasts to avoid being completely useless. So to me, a "sorceror" is better off just using the combat spells that are there and stearing completely clear of this idea. [/QUOTE]

Verification