|
5 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2008 - 9:57AM
#421
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2005
|
Actually, for Timestop I make the player roll for the duration, that is the time he thinks he has, then I roll the real duration, which is not often the same. Any attempt to cheese here is met with harsh consequences, like a poorly worded Wish spell :evillaugh What you will see is that sometimes players end up with more time than they thought, others will end up with less time, making for entertaining situations to be sure :angelhide
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2008 - 5:01PM
#422
|
Date Joined:
Mar 23, 2005
|
4, time stop only affects the caster by speeding him up to the point where it 'appears' he has extra rounds (time stop done any other way is either insanely overpowered [literally, you would be slowing down the ENTIRE MATERIAL PLANE  ], or have an immovable rod quandry [is that AoE/rod effect local or universal, if it's universal how much damage does a planet do?]) IIRC that is the official explanation for how time stop works
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2008 - 6:55PM
#423
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2001
|
so its not game balance to say "I don't allow flight as a spell in my game." but it is balanced to require every GM regardless of experience to try and house rule a overland type flight/teleport/polymorph/what have you spell if they want it in their game?[/quote]
Yes.
Including a broken rule destroys the balance of the game. It's the designers job to hand us a product that works, not to plan for every little thing we might want.
And Second, nobody is required to add any spells. Why is it a prereq to have overland flight/teleport in your game? Just because it happened to exist in 1E, 2E or 3E isn't reason to have it here either.
It's gone, live with it.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 30, 2008 - 8:16PM
#424
|
Date Joined:
May 31, 2004
|
A reason to have it here might be all those people like me who DO enjoy those spells and would rather they either be implented properly or dropped not neutered and muzzled to the point of uselessness.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Mar 31, 2008 - 3:56PM
#425
|
|
|
Actually, for Timestop I make the player roll for the duration, that is the time he thinks he has, then I roll the real duration, which is not often the same. Any attempt to cheese here is met with harsh consequences, like a poorly worded Wish spell :evillaugh What you will see is that sometimes players end up with more time than they thought, others will end up with less time, making for entertaining situations to be sure :angelhide
Well, as a high level wizard, in game and with no metagame knowledge except experience I would eventually conclude that I was a poor judge of the time that a timestop spell gives and just design sequences of actions that build one one another in case I turn out to be grossly wrong.
Smart people do this sort of thing all of the time and it only takes a few cases of thinking you have five rounds and getting two rounds to figure out that you simply can't judge these types of things in the heat of the moment.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 04, 2008 - 11:40PM
#426
|
|
|
Is it so wrong for lv20 PCs to be able to dictate the terms on which they do battle? That seems exactly like the sort of thing they ought to be capable of achieving at that sort of power level. Else, there really does not seem much for a wizard to look forward to, save for his spells doing more damage, and I certainly don't want some sort of warmage variant...
I admit that it might be problematic that PCs can use teleport/shadow walk/gate/planeshift etc to zip past any encounter in that the DM may find it hard to properly design a campaign. But I dunno - a high lv wizard just does not seem complete without such "iconic" spells at his disposal. It just does not seem the same when the wizard has to leave by the front door rather than disappear in a puff of smoke and whisk back to his tower...:P
I admit that certain spells like PAO are potentially game-breaking, but they are also the very spells that inject so much spice into the game. I mean - some of the more memorable moments of my games were when the players were strutting around polymorphed to their hearts' content.
Is there really no way of reconciling them?
No there is not. No way of fixing them, none.
Because the issue isnt the spells themselves. The issue is that the first time your NPC lich uses scry/buff/teleport to massacre the PC's while they are asleep in some inn your gonna hear an ungodly din of whining and complaining.
Those spells aren't broke because of thier power or because of characters. They are broke because of players and DM's.
Any spell a player can use to its utmost but a DM has to have kids gloves with is broken. The game has to mechanically be arranged so that people can play equal level combatants to thier utmost or its not working. And thats the end all be all of why i never allowed teleport after my first NPC wizard TPKed a party asleep at an inn and i never heard the end of it.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 05, 2008 - 1:31PM
#427
|
Date Joined:
Jun 25, 2001
|
A reason to have it here might be all those people like me who DO enjoy those spells and would rather they either be implented properly or dropped not neutered and muzzled to the point of uselessness.
I don't think either spell has been made useless. They've at worst gone from being uber spells to being special case spells. I mean seriously, people are probably going to take the nerfed fly and invisibility anyway. Flight is a crazy awesome ability in D&D.
|
|
|
|
5 years ago ::
Apr 11, 2008 - 6:02AM
#428
|
|
|
I reckon they should get rid of arcane mark. It takes up space that could be used for something more exciting.
While I don't mind the idea of arcane marks so much, do they have to use a spell for it?
arcane mark is awesome, ok so you're fighting an invisible foe and only one of your party (the caster can see them) they cast an arcane mark on the invisible foe and the rest of the party know where the guy is..., there are other fun uses but thats the one I've actually seen used in a campeign I was in.
|
|
|
