Search results

1) They don't say exactly, only if the spell would work 2) Why is that a problem, exactly? They worked hard to weaken the enemy so that the wizard can finish it with their most powerful spell. That's GOT to be a better scenario than "Oops, sorry...had 3 too many hp for that spell to work. Too...

Oh, for sure, D&D isn't like that at all...but maybe it should be if it had hp-thresholds for spells. Just to be clear, players in 13A don't know the hp totals of their enemies, just if their hp-dependent spells would work or not.

Fortunately, 13th Age has both! As well, hp totals aren't a secret; if your spell wouldn't apply because of a hp threshold, the GM tells you so...it's not a game of GM gotchas!

I think it's possible that a lot of these issues are addressed by putting hp thresholds on spells...matches a lot of narratives as well (Having to weaken your powerful enemy before the spell can snare him or some such).

24? 2d8 +4 for Con gets 20...unless I am missing something?

I think this is definitely part of it, yes. Kicking in doors to take stuff can still be a very fun game, but I find that board games now give me that experience in a great way (dungeon crawler board games have come a long way, IMO...my current fav being Journeys in Middle Earth, though I am...

It's really not the same. That's an inference YOU are making; it's certainly not what Minigiant said.

Nah. Casual conversations with strangers have no burdens.

Sure, if he was trying to get published or whatever...this is just a message board, there's no burden. You can look it up yourself, but you won't because you might discover he's right.

Nah. You're not his supervisor. He doesn't owe you anything; you're just a random guy on a message board. He's not trying to get an academic paper published, either. He is making a claim, doesn't have the citation on hand at the ready, but knows what one can use as a search if they are so...

Nah. He said what to look for; he doesn't have to do the work to provide links and whatnot. It'd be nice, but there's no demand; if someone wants to see for themselves, it's a google search away. Besides, even if he did, it's not looking that it would change anyone's mind, anyway. People...

Unless you're his boss, he has no burden to prove anything to you. Or any of us.

Even if attrition worked that way (it doesn't), all that means is that the DM has to have slogs of encounters just to wear down resources and hope one of the latter is that encounter-ending control spell. So what happens? Players learn to always save a spell. DMs have to come up with reasons...

Campaign is becoming absurd at this point though, and probably not what the GM had in mind as "fun."

So...hopefully the DM wants to run this. Hopefully the DM is ok with tossing out a bunch of his ideas into the trash and now, come up from scratch, a whole new campaign theme of "PCs on the Run!"

It isn't, you're absolutely right. I am not sure WotC, specifically, care all that much about any other standard, though...especially if it doesn't impact sales in a big way.

...wha? Why on Earth would they think that's a good idea? It's clearly not meant to be an in-combat spell...any spell with a casting time measured in minutes isn't. The spell is hardly worthless. The PCs strategy skills OTOH...

If characters don't know their abilities mechanically, wouldn't there be moments where the wizard tries to cast Fireball but fails to do so because he doesn't know he only has 2nd and 1st level slots left? So...the player loses her turn or something?

Sorry, I thought the sarcasm was obvious. My apologies.

D&D makes a ton of money. There is no problem to be fixed.