fuzzlewump
First Post
At least one person in this thread have tried it and liked it. Some people thought it was bad. Call them 'not sensible' all you want, but I think you'll find the opposite.And most sensible people with experience of multiple systems wouldn't even try. As I said, I don't need to mix milk and lemon juice to know it's a disgusting drink.
And a wizard would know that I imagine, in-game. The wizard wouldn't know it does 1d6 level per 'caster level' exactly, but the wizard would know things that the wizard could observe in-game.The trouble is that the characters must. Mechanical effects are what stands between them (in character) and death or even accidental suicide. If the wizard doesn't know he can cast fireball, he's dangerous. And he damn well needs to know whether fireball is a 20' radius explosion or whether it fills a set volume and casting it in kobold tunnels or castle corridors is suicidal.
No doubt other systems are better, but you're being overly critical of this idea. Hey, I don't like it either actually. But some of your criticisms aren't what the OP was talking about. In what way do the player's need to be blind? You're suggesting that a wizard wouldn't know his spells, but he would, he just wouldn't know the exact mechanical effect of those spells. He doesn't know that enemies can reflex save for half, he doesn't know the exact damage, and he doesn't know what his saving throw is that the monsters have to beat. Although, for the reflex save, he would soon observe some enemies dodging it. Or would simply know it from his magical studies.At that point even in theory the players need to blind themselves to things their characters would care about. And that's really going to help them roleplay. Now if you want to instead go for an effects-based spontaneous magic system rather than one with predetermined hard-coded spells, a lot of the objections weaken or even evaporate. But D&D is not such a system. Which is why a lot of us have been suggesting that other systems that would suit the idea better.
Same thing when a DM does anything wrong, be it a wrong rule or something. Communicate with the DM. (Edit: [MENTION=19675]Dannyalcatraz[/MENTION], same answer for your post here.)And if the DM accidently wrote "Wizard" on the character sheet when the character concept was cloistered cleric of Bocobob or Ioun? The player can roleplay a desire for turning - but can go whistle.
I'm not sure you're understanding where I'm coming from. I'm saying the player wouldn't care about those significant differences. The player would roleplay and state thematic criteria he wants his character to fill, and if the mechanics of the character follow those criteria, he's happy. If the players criteria is a mechanical class instead of a concept, then this type of game is not appropriate for that player. In other words, there's no way someone who was not (edit: extremely) flexible would enjoy playing this.This is why D&D is the wrong game to try this sort of nonsense in. There is a significant difference between a Paladin, a Fighter, and a Fighter/Cleric. And IC the character ought to know his magical capabilities (unless he's taken too many knocks to the head). Remember Clerics in D&D (pre-4e) wear heavy armour and fight in the front lines.
Again, I don't really like this idea and wouldn't ever do it. My players, and I when I play, have too much fun building characters and comparing numbers and junk. That doesn't mean the idea is 'stupid,' as you say, it just means it's not for us.
Last edited: