What is the essence of D&D

Nagol

Unimportant
Sorry. “Revolution of the list”?

Not sure what you mean.

You need to check knowledge of every spell in the spell list before you get another chance to check a spell again unless your Int changes in a permanent manner. And you only get to check again if you haven't hit minimum.

1e PHB pg.10 said:
The character may select spells desired in any order he or she wishes. Each spell may be checked only once. Percentile dice are rolled, and if the number generated is equal to or less than the percentage chance shown, then the character can learn and thus know that spell (it may be in his or her spell books - explained hereafter).

...

If one complete check through the entire group fails to generate the minimum number applicable according to intelligence score, the character may selectively go back through the group, checking each spell not able to be learned once again. This process continues until the minimum number requirement has been fulfilled.

...

If intelligence goes down or up for any reason, and such change is relatively permanent, the magic-user must check again as explained above for known spells by level group.

...

Acquisition of Heretofore Unknown Spells: Although the magic-user must immediately cease checking to determine if spells are known after the first complete check of each spell in the level group, or immediately thereafter during successive checks when the minimum number of spells which can be known is reached, it is possible to acquire knowledge of additional spells previously unknown as long as this does not violate the maximum number of spells which can be known. New spells can be gained from captured or otherwise acquired spell books or from scrolls of magic spells.

As an aside, a house rule I use and see a lot is increases in Int won't force a Magic-user to forget a spell. Technically, that's not true.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

You have now touched on a matter in which I have some professional experience.

Some customers have very specific preferences.
Other customers just want a "regular pizza", and will get sour with servers who waste their time bombarding them with options.
What do you give to people who want a regular pizza? Just cheese? Or do you push the most expensive thing you can get away with?
 

The thing is it doesn’t actually matter. The other complaints about 4e appear in other editions. So since the same elements exist between editions that are and are not considered part of DND, then they are not essential.
Are the same people complaining about these elements in the other editions?
If not, then they are not perceptually the same element.
If they are not perceptually the same element, then the essence of D&D could hinge upon that perceptual difference.

You can argue until you're blue in the face that they're "factually" the same, that it's "nonsense" for people to perceive a difference, but that entire line of discussion is totally missing the point. People do perceive a difference. That is the only fact of consequence here. So far you have been twisting, denying, downplaying, ridiculing, or simply ignoring that fact to suit your theories. Instead you need to suit your theories to that fact.
 
Last edited:

Nagol

Unimportant
Pretty sure 1e is also one shot per level at learning a given spell, provided you still have headroom below the limit. And yes, gaining an Int point also gives you another shot.

You also, I think, get a random new spell each time you train; which if you're lucky might just happen to be the useful one you've blown several times otherwise. :)

Nope. I guess it is a common house rule. It's one shot period unless you don't hit your minimum or change your Int. Gaining spells per level doesn't come in until 3e. That's probably another house rule to help out magic-users.
 

What do you give to people who want a regular pizza? Just cheese? Or do you push the most expensive thing you can get away with?
You have to press them for more detail, and accept that you're gonna annoy them a bit, because you'll annoy them a lot more if you guess and guess wrong. You're set up for failure by the disconnect between the option-heavy menu and their simplicity-seeking preferences.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
Except they are on the same team firing at an indeterminate enemy and I am shooting over the fighters shoulder? Did yu mess where I repeated it was sarcasm about them being vs each other? and I only did the sarcasm because you had already seemed to jump to a conclusion it was vs.
Dude. I'm showing which is the better fighter. Aiming both at them at the unknown doesn't show that. There are too many variables like 2 orcs and a kobold, where one of the orcs has a shield and the other doesn't. If you want to know which is the better fighter, you aim them at each other. Best of 1000.

Dart throwing wizard or the fighter aimed at each other 1000 times. Which do you think will win most of those fights? Hint: It isn't the wizard.
 

Maxperson

Morkus from Orkus
The thing is it doesn’t actually matter. The other complaints about 4e appear in other editions. So since the same elements exist between editions that are and are not considered part of DND, then they are not essential.
Except not. Many of the "Not D&D" complaints about 4e are about HOW the elements are presented, not what the elements are.
 

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
A point which no one has been able to bring any contrary evidence against, so, they've gone wading into edition warring territory and talking about how 4e failed and whatnot because everything else seems to point to the Primacy of Magic being an accurate accounting of the essence of D&D.

You, Tony, and Garthanos count as "everything else"?

I...and I am sure others...would agree that the "Presence of Magic" is somehow part of the equation. But it alone is insufficient, nor is it primary.
 


Garthanos

Arcadian Knight
Dude. I'm showing which is the better fighter. Aiming both at them at the unknown

Its just not my goal in general I was showing contribution after firing that spell in a more normal setting - maybe its yours.

Plus a ranged combatant can have less hit points with fewer problems so i am not sure its realistic either to make it a face to face duel.

Kobolds are basically what the example shows (7) d4 and goblins(8) d8 human soldiers with ac 8 to 4 with d6 hit points they are level appropriate enemies using weapons.

The AC in the example I was doing works out perfectly as a kobold but that favors the Dart thrower a lot .... as a Goblin the armor goes up slightly and does not guarantee the wizard quite so many kills.


The mage is now contributing and can do so situationally,
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top