Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mark" data-source="post: 367706" data-attributes="member: 5"><p>You should cehck the CMG release link above.&nbsp; I think it fits the bill.&nbsp; I've heard a lot of discussion that the dropping of the proper names from the spells just released to the SRD by WotC would cause some difficulties.&nbsp; This seems to be mainly perceived as a problem because it upsets the alphabetical order of spells.&nbsp; To try and offer a simple solution, I've taken those spells involved in the controvery and adjusted the names to try and keep them close to their old order.&nbsp; Remember, with the addition of so many 3rd party publisher spells to the d20 landscape, I had to try and use more than just the old first initial, lest the addition of other spells continue to move the old ones out of order too much.&nbsp; Hopefully this solution will be seen as a fair compromise to the problem.&nbsp; <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&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Mark, post: 367706, member: 5"] You should cehck the CMG release link above. I think it fits the bill. I've heard a lot of discussion that the dropping of the proper names from the spells just released to the SRD by WotC would cause some difficulties. This seems to be mainly perceived as a problem because it upsets the alphabetical order of spells. To try and offer a simple solution, I've taken those spells involved in the controvery and adjusted the names to try and keep them close to their old order. Remember, with the addition of so many 3rd party publisher spells to the d20 landscape, I had to try and use more than just the old first initial, lest the addition of other spells continue to move the old ones out of order too much. Hopefully this solution will be seen as a fair compromise to the problem. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification