Community

Jan 13, 2013 -- 5:29PM, Maxperson wrote:

What are your qualifications that allow you to decide that for all of us?

I asked the question.

We've explained it several times.  Sticking your head in the sand doesn't change that fact. 

My head is not in the sand. I didnt ignore anything. I thought about the reasons and determined that they werent good enough for a core spell list. I did however come up with a decent reason myself that was similar to wrecan's.

You still haven't explained why you should get what you want, but nobody else should. 

I did. Most are not useful enough to invest money in. If they aren’t useful then they don’t belong in core. If they do make it in then I would prefer they be part of a combat ritual feat. Casters are powerful enough. I would rather limit their power based on what they invest in so characters are different. If someone wants to roleplay a mystic shaman type that prepares rituals to improve their tribes fighting ability and with that they can also cast any combat spell as a ritual, fine. To simply give every caster that ability is free metamagic at a time when casting is already free and easier than its ever been.

I see no reason why either one has to be first.  They could very easily be done concurrently.

For me its a lack of faith in the devs. If we dont get rituals that were created to be rituals first then I dont expect to get them at all. We still dont have a ritual list in Next. Possibly as a result of not having a ritual list we are missing the more hardcoded ground up rituals like Gentle Respose, Magic Mouth and the Eye of Spells.

No.  I'm saying that they don't have to be balanced with combat in mind.

You can use them when you have an undercover sneak attack so they are a lose part

Jan 13, 2013 -- 4:07PM, wrecan wrote:

What version of the spell are you using?!  3e's version does not specifiy it makes other people's lips appear to move.  Nor does 4'e Prestigitation power.  I don't recall either of AD&D's ventriloquism spells causing other people's lips to move.

In 2e you can make it appear as if it is coming from a person so it was my understanding that if the person is speaking their lips will parse the words you want them to say. It fooled an entire tavern in the comic book.

I still have no idea what you mean by "enlightenment".  I have no idea what "navigate through dynamic, and risky factors better than before" means.

Its the game within the game. Think Pac Man. The maze is dynamic; the ghost present risk, finding a pattern that navigates through the maze and avoids/kills the ghost is enlightenment.

Ritual casting cannot be covered.  That's been pretty explicit.  It's loud and obvious.

Good to know. There goes the only decent reason I could muster for their existence.

What does that mean?  Minor components are nto proxies for gold.  Minor components are fiddly exercises in bookkeeping.  You said you wanted somethign that was neither fiddly nor proxies and when I asked you what that was, you dove straight into a system of fiddly bookkeeping.

I don’t have such an issue with bookkeeping. For me its ok when its done right. As long as the items are minimized and damageable/precious then it’s more of a matter of protecting something of value than 10 vials of guano and ox musk.   

So you want spellcasting to be an exercise in bookkeeping. You want wizards to have to keep track of bits of wool, eyes of newt, and little cans ties up with string.  Stop claiming you don't want fiddly bookkeeping.

Just for a pure vancian spells not for rituals.


 

I don't know what Fire Emblem is and I don't care to learn.  Can you explain what you mean in plain English?  Please?

 

It’s a Nintendo Strategy videogame with a small following as a pen and paper game. fireemblemtt-enemygenerator.uphero.com/ Good resource to see what the classes look like. One area where it really stands above Next is the individuality in martial stats.

Jan 16, 2013 -- 12:35PM, mellored wrote:

 No more then aiming 20 x-bows at a door and a bit of string to would be.

Why waste the time when you can make pina colada's with the coconuts you shot out of the tree with ritual magic missiles?

Plus, they would be flashy, loud, and easily interuptable.  Not a stealth thing.

Still usable in combat if you are attacking someone who is flashy, loud and not so easy to interrupt.

Most are not going to be used.  Most would not have components.  I don't see the issue with either thing.  If you want a sepcial spell that uses exotic components to do special things, that's not hindered at all.

The only possible pit fall i see is that it may give wizards a bit too much utility compaired to other classes (and then, i would suggest buffing other classes).

Obviously it gives them more utility if they are casting them free without components.
Thats why you should just call it metamagic and be real about it. You are suggesting something that is easier on casters than what is already in Next. For a lot of people MDD is already a balance patch. Do martial classes really need a buff?

Bottom line:  Rituals enable creativly.  If you think that's a bad thing, then we'll just have to disagree.

If that were true we would have more examples of how to use the ten minute fireball.  This thread has more than 650 views and the best example for why Fireball should be ritualized is to threaten cornered enemies.  We would see more creativity if the devs spent time on rituals.

As harsh as I might have been to proclaim that most of 4e’s rituals were refugees from AEDU I should be just as harsh on Next for not porting the many rituals from 4e that better represented the mechanic. The list of sensible non-combat rituals that didn’t make Next is pretty large. From L to T there are Leomund’s Secret Chest, Linked Portal Loremaster’s Bargain, Magic Circle, Make Whole, Magic Mouth, Phantom Steed, Planar Portal, Remove Affliction, Secret Page, Sending, Shadow Walk, Tenser’s Floating Disk, Traveler’s Feast, and True Portal.