Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Scott Christian" data-source="post: 9015280" data-attributes="member: 6901101">I mean, not to be that guy, but I doubt Hallucinatory Terrain has never been used. It's a ridiculous thing to say. You haven't seen it. Okay. That is your experience. But there may be many players out there that do use it because it fits the theme of their character. It fits their table's theme or their character's theme. I swear it feels like everything argued about in D&amp;D is always over a player wanting something removed that limits their character or something added that helps their character. Like the concept of strengths and weaknesses, the the thematic notions of themes and one shots, doesn't exist for these players. Of course rituals (for the players) should follow a power balance. But why can't you just have a 2nd level spell that is a bit better than another 2nd level spell? We all know Cloud of Daggers is better than Thunderclap. But my wizard took Thunderclap because he was themed as a sailor, and all his spells were weather based. We all know Tasha's Mind Whip is better than Melf's Acid Arrow, but maybe the lore tells us Tasha was just better at coming up with damage spells? We all know Flaming Sphere is better than Dust Devil, yet Dust Devil has a cool unquantifiable effect if placed in the right circumstance. My point is - none of this is quantifiable. Damage might be, but when you add in range, effects, and most of all circumstances and table/player preference, no one is able to say this spell should stay and this should go.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Scott Christian, post: 9015280, member: 6901101"] I mean, not to be [I]that guy[/I], but I doubt Hallucinatory Terrain has never been used. It's a ridiculous thing to say. You haven't seen it. Okay. That is your experience. But there may be many players out there that do use it because it fits the theme of their character. It fits their table's theme or their character's theme. I swear it feels like everything argued about in D&D is always over a player wanting something removed that limits their character or something added that helps their character. Like the concept of strengths and weaknesses, the the thematic notions of themes and one shots, doesn't exist for these players. Of course rituals (for the players) should follow a power balance. But why can't you just have a 2nd level spell that is a bit better than another 2nd level spell? We all know Cloud of Daggers is better than Thunderclap. But my wizard took Thunderclap because he was themed as a sailor, and all his spells were weather based. We all know Tasha's Mind Whip is better than Melf's Acid Arrow, but maybe the lore tells us Tasha was just better at coming up with damage spells? We all know Flaming Sphere is better than Dust Devil, yet Dust Devil has a cool unquantifiable effect if placed in the right circumstance. My point is - none of this is quantifiable. Damage might be, but when you add in range, effects, and most of all circumstances and table/player preference, no one is able to say this spell should stay and this should go. [/QUOTE]

Verification