NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fuindordm" data-source="post: 5864813" data-attributes="member: 5435">If we're going down the "skill roll" road, I'd prefer the 4E model of attack rolls vs static defenses. Either way the player had to roll something, and it's more similar to how a fighter works. But I prefer even more the 3E model of "cast a spell and it always goes off", because I want magic to lean more toward the Vancian model of getting a few encounter-changing effects per day. Having said that, however, I think a skill roll with side effects for failure is a robust limitation on magic, which could replace the standard V/S/M limitation.  It's great for the Wild Mage archetype, for example. As for the first point, I don't want spellcasters to have to choose a specialty outside the theme defined by their class choice. Cleric + domains (as extras) is OK, and I wouldn't mind an option for clerics to specialize in the domains at the cost of fewer general spells per day (for example), but it's important that PCs can fulfill all their general functions. Too much specialization can be crippling.[ASIDE: The 2E model of spheres was a good attempt at making cleric magic more flavorful, but I found it very difficult to manage and balance. Deities ended up granting lots of minor spheres just so that the cleric could cover the basics at low levels, but the spell choice for higher level spells was too severely limited. The 3E model strikes a very good balance between general functionality and specialization]By the same token, I don't want fighters to have to specialize in a single weapon to be effective.  I'd rather see them have a choice between feats/class abilities that supports both the "master of a weapon" play style and the "master of arms" play style.  For example, if Weapon Focus + Weapon Specialization (two feats) gives +1 to hit and +2 to damage, would it be balanced to have another two-feat sequence that gives +1 damage with all weapons, and +2 to threat confirmation rolls with all weapons?Phew! That was longer than I intended. Regarding your last point, increased casting time for better effect sounds like a really good rule for all spellcasters.Cheerio,Ben</blockquote>

Verification