Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ArchfiendBobbie" data-source="post: 7202035" data-attributes="member: 6867728">It helps if the details are not piecemeal and scattered. And if I don't almost have to join the Inquisition just to get a friggin' answer.I don't like lugging around comfy chairs!Because insulting something until it attacks you doesn't require mechanics, even in 3E. There is no d20 roll to tell a dragon that you're going to melt its hoard down and smelt the gold into a riding saddle for it. Or accusing it of being completely not worth your time or even not fit to beat into submission.So, once again, lack of creativity...Which, again, has what to do with the lack of creativity in trying to provoke the dragon? Overall, you're picking up on the details that have absolutely no importance to what I said about creativity as though they make any difference.And yet, of those conclusions, only one was actually wrong; everything you've said since has supported the lack of creativity and even gone as far as to suggest a lack of proper preparation. It does bring up a question why, even if it was a one-shot, the group wasn't prepared with some of the more essential utility spells.Then why can't you provide any detail on how he taunted? What did he actually say when he taunted the dragon?You like to claim he was thorough, yet have this strange inability to give anything resembling a detail beyond that he rolled for it... leaving no conclusion except a complete lack of creativity in his efforts to get the dragon's attention since there are absolutely no details to suggest otherwise.Does bolding it make it more likely I'll get an answer? If you can't remember, just admit that.You mean, as monumentally stupid as one character being completely useless due to a lack of ranged weapons or ability to keep up with the airborne creature?Details! See, it helps if you provide these.So, why wasn't Fly one of the wands? It was low-enough level back then to be a wand, and not at all expensive for a wand. I can understand if the cap was just that low, though. But Fly itself, even back then, was a well-known utility spell considered essential by most players.Seriously, with Fly, many of the party could have melee'd the dragon while it was in the air. Given how many flying enemies were present in that edition and how it was one of the ones that heavily encouraged a certain tactical thinking, I do question why no one thought to bring it along. Damaging spells are nice, but they don't make up for the lack of melee support if you're up against an airborne creature. 5E it makes a bit more sense, due to how 5E limits magic, but 3E? I question the reasoning why.</blockquote>

Verification