Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nonlethal Force" data-source="post: 3219825" data-attributes="member: 35788">Honestly, I think the main problem is how DMs construct their games.&nbsp; If your game is bent on destroying creatures to get XP ... well ... you better expect people to choose spells that are the most effective at destroying creatures.&nbsp; That's totally fair.In my games, about 5% of game time is spent in combat.&nbsp; Yep, we got tired of combat.&nbsp; People still play fighters and clerics and wizards and barbarians.&nbsp; But we're not focused on combat that much.&nbsp; If you are in a game that you don't expect to get into many combats ... why take fireball?&nbsp; Why take MM?I'm not criticizing anyone who does, of course.&nbsp; I love MM.&nbsp; It and the aforementioned Invisibility are the two standards of magic across all spectra.&nbsp; Talk about fantasy and you'd throw in Fireball, too.DMs that are tired of seeing Fireball, be creative and make players grow into realizing that they can play in situations that don't mandate fireball or MM!&nbsp; It really is that simple.&nbsp; Your players will play according to the standard you set for them.&nbsp; If you want the players to change, start with yourself as the DM.You don't expect a surgeon to operate with a scalpel anymore (and especially not a hacksaw!).&nbsp; You expect lasers (and often robotic guided lasers at that for really serious surgery!)&nbsp; A surgeon is going to choose the best tool for the job they're asked to do.&nbsp; Players are going to be the same.&nbsp; If they have to fight for their lives, they're going to pick spells that give them the best chance at that.&nbsp; If you want players to pick more &quot;interesting&quot; spells, give them a game that is more &quot;interesting.&quot;I don't have a problem with a group that loves combat ... and I expect to see greatswords, wands of CLW, and spell lists containing MM, Fireball, and Invisibility.&nbsp; I also don't have a problem with gaming groups that want to move beyond that.&nbsp; There's nothing wrong with either scenario!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nonlethal Force, post: 3219825, member: 35788"] Honestly, I think the main problem is how DMs construct their games. If your game is bent on destroying creatures to get XP ... well ... you better expect people to choose spells that are the most effective at destroying creatures. That's totally fair. In my games, about 5% of game time is spent in combat. Yep, we got tired of combat. People still play fighters and clerics and wizards and barbarians. But we're not focused on combat that much. If you are in a game that you don't expect to get into many combats ... why take fireball? Why take MM? I'm not criticizing anyone who does, of course. I love MM. It and the aforementioned Invisibility are the two standards of magic across all spectra. Talk about fantasy and you'd throw in Fireball, too. DMs that are tired of seeing Fireball, be creative and make players grow into realizing that they can play in situations that don't mandate fireball or MM! It really is that simple. Your players will play according to the standard you set for them. If you want the players to change, start with yourself as the DM. You don't expect a surgeon to operate with a scalpel anymore (and especially not a hacksaw!). You expect lasers (and often robotic guided lasers at that for really serious surgery!) A surgeon is going to choose the best tool for the job they're asked to do. Players are going to be the same. If they have to fight for their lives, they're going to pick spells that give them the best chance at that. If you want players to pick more "interesting" spells, give them a game that is more "interesting." I don't have a problem with a group that loves combat ... and I expect to see greatswords, wands of CLW, and spell lists containing MM, Fireball, and Invisibility. I also don't have a problem with gaming groups that want to move beyond that. There's nothing wrong with either scenario! [/QUOTE]

Verification