Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5981122" data-attributes="member: 42582">On teleport: the first published high-level exploration module, Descent Into the Depths of the Earth, has a teleport-nerf written into it. This suggests to me that the designers actually didn't intend teleport to operate as an "adventure-winning" ability. (I assume they thought that it would allow boring/headache-cauasing travel to be skipped, as [MENTION=29398]Lanefan[/MENTION] has suggested.)On Knock: if there is no wizard to cast fireball, the rogue can't take his/her place. So why should the wizard be able to take the rogue's place? And why should the wizard be better at this back-up role than the rogue? Leaving aside the fact that the only time the rogue will be opening locks "all day long" is if s/he is putting on a Houdini performance, the cost for the wizard in learning and memorising a Knock spell is close to trivial - whereas for the rogue it is one of the few class abilities (in AD&D) and/or represents a significant character build investment (in 2nd ed AD&D or 3E).This.In this and some other recent threads Elf Witch has also said the following:I think "boring" fighters are not unrelated to powerful magic. I also think that simply dropping teleport without error (as Elf Witch suggested upthread) isn't enough of a "bringing down" of wizard abilities to seriously improve fighters.This is the paradox of D&D reform: everyone can see that it needs changing, but a big chunk of players seems to have desires that are in tension with any of the necessary changes!</blockquote>

Verification