Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 6643329" data-attributes="member: 996">Yep, sorry about that, fixed it.&nbsp;I tried using the option to do a multi-quote earlier in the thread, and now they're showing up every time I try to quote anyone. They won't go away, and it's messing with attribution.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown&nbsp; &nbsp; :("&nbsp; data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" />&nbsp;I haven't seen anyone make the claim that the right spell will always be available, just that the more important a given task is, the more sense it would make to expend a sure-thing limited resource instead of risk failure.&nbsp; I think it's obvious that a limited resource is not always available, thus 'limited.' Now 5e neo-Vancian, combining the flexibility of 3.x Prepped &amp; Spontaneous casting, does make it pretty likely that a given spell will be available, relative to prior editions (though wands &amp; scrolls were trivially available in 3.x).&nbsp; But prepared/known spells are still finite, and slots are still a limited resource, and both must be managed.Managing such resources well, is, of course, one example of system mastery.&nbsp; So, sure, the poorer the system mastery/resource management at the table, and the fewer limited resources the party collectively has, the less likely just the right limited resource will be available at the optimal moment.&nbsp; In that sense, merely playing a non-EK fighter makes it more likely the party will fall back on him making some check at an important moment, since playing a fighter instead of a full caster reduces the total spell resources available to the party.&nbsp; In an all-Champion party, for instance, their RA-enhanced checks will never be obviated by the expenditure of a spell resource.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 6643329, member: 996"] Yep, sorry about that, fixed it. I tried using the option to do a multi-quote earlier in the thread, and now they're showing up every time I try to quote anyone. They won't go away, and it's messing with attribution. :( I haven't seen anyone make the claim that the right spell will always be available, just that the more important a given task is, the more sense it would make to expend a sure-thing limited resource instead of risk failure. I think it's obvious that a limited resource is not always available, thus 'limited.' Now 5e neo-Vancian, combining the flexibility of 3.x Prepped & Spontaneous casting, does make it pretty likely that a given spell will be available, relative to prior editions (though wands & scrolls were trivially available in 3.x). But prepared/known spells are still finite, and slots are still a limited resource, and both must be managed. Managing such resources well, is, of course, one example of system mastery. So, sure, the poorer the system mastery/resource management at the table, and the fewer limited resources the party collectively has, the less likely just the right limited resource will be available at the optimal moment. In that sense, merely playing a non-EK fighter makes it more likely the party will fall back on him making some check at an important moment, since playing a fighter instead of a full caster reduces the total spell resources available to the party. In an all-Champion party, for instance, their RA-enhanced checks will never be obviated by the expenditure of a spell resource. [/QUOTE]

Verification