Quote from: Settembrini;543401Introducing infinities is always bad. It always lets all logic implode.

I remember all the shennanigans players tried to pull off with the eldritch blasts from that variant class in 3.5! That stuff just does not work.

9d6 damage at-will breaks errything.  :rolleyes:

Indeed! And it makes a HUGE difference if an adventurer might have a wand that allows him to cast, say a 1000 times a 9D6 "fire lance" or if it is at-will.

In fact, the difference is infinitely large!

I agree, like letting someone swing his or her sword whenever they wants...madness!

On a more related note, concerning the example of using the magic missile to 'test' targets. Can't we simply bend the rules a bit and say, let that mimic make a Con save (I'd use a Cha save actually) to avoid making any reaction to the attack/pain. Is it reasonable to expect perfect feedback from your spells? I'd think not.

Quote from: Kord's Boon;543452I agree, like letting someone swing his or her sword whenever they wants...madness!

On a more related note, concerning the example of using the magic missile to 'test' targets. Can't we simply bend the rules a bit and say, let that mimic make a Con save (I'd use a Cha save actually) to avoid making any reaction to the attack/pain. Is it reasonable to expect perfect feedback from your spells? I'd think not.

It's not the reaction that is at issue. The point is as written the effect won't trigger if it doesn't target a creature.

Quote from: jibbajibba;543469The point is as written the effect won't trigger if it doesn't target a creature.

It's odd that it's written that way. Without a specific caveat that the magic somehow needs a consciousness (because it's magic... I guess) to trigger it makes very little sense.

Magic missile is a force effect, like the Wall of Force, Cube of Force and so on. If you were to cast a Wall of Force and crush pieces of furnitures with it well... it would damage items. The idea that a magic missile would not damage inanimate objects is strange to me.

Quote from: Benoist;542539And you get off your own high horse girl and stop pretending like you have the high ground because you really, really don't on this one. If you have your pew pew at wills as a module it's cool for you. If we are talking about the baseline and core of the D&D game, which I am, it is another matter entirely. So stop being a bitch and live with the fact that if you are going to advocate for these sorts of changes in D&Ds you are going to meet some objections on my part. If you can't live with that fact, well that's too bad. I'll keep pushing back.

I've advocated for the same thing Benny, but I don't see you crawling up my ass about it, what's the beef with Marleycat? I think some at-will magic is just as cool as some ritual magic. I've been playing D&D for decades, so I know what "D&D is" just as well as you (maybe better). Here's something brother. you want pure Vancian? Keep playing 1e (in other words, you can take your own advice just as well as anyone else and go play another game). It hasn't vanished in a puff of smoke. I like some at-will spells, I want some at-will spells, I'm not alone, them's the breaks brother. if that alone would "destroy" D&D for you, ah-well, there's an entire world full of activities to choose from. Oh, but by all means, keep throwing a temper tantrum about it, especially if you don't want to be taken seriously at all. Fuck... all this angst and foot-stomping over a fucking not even published yet game... it's insane.

Quote from: Sigmund;543478I've advocated for the same thing Benny

Come on, man. Stop rewinding days of conversation like this. Read the whole thread first, then comment, please, because what you're talking about has been settled. Temporarily maybe, but settled nonetheless. We moved on.

Quote from: Benoist;543479Come on, man. Stop rewinding days of conversation like this. Read the whole thread first, then comment, please, because what you're talking about has been settled. Temporarily maybe, but settled nonetheless. We moved on.

More like we agree to disagree. But you're right it's a done issue as far as I'm concerned.

As for me just playing with AD&D, well DUH! I can and will do that in the event that things that rub me the wrong way pile up in D&D Next to the point I will consider it a pain in the ass to retool and house rule the game to do with it what I want. Note that there IS a difference here for me between having modules and options in the game that you can turn off and on, and having to completely retool it to play the way I want.

But then, in the latter case, WotC runs into a significant problem: if enough people are doing this, then D&D Next fails at its design goal, which is to provide a structure of rules that enables Marleycat, jibbajibba and me to play OUR D&D games with it. And that's the real danger here, as TCO noted some time ago: that the game ends up being a big "meh" to several subgroups of D&D fans, to just end up switching audiences with the same bottom-line issues it had with 4e.

Quote from: Benoist;542605Cool. When I want to play the Dying Earth RPG... I play the fucking Dying Earth RPG that already exists. When I want to play a mage that alters the fabric of reality, I play fucking Mage. When I want to play wuxia, I play fucking L5R, Exalted, what have you.

When I want to play D&D? I'd like to be able to actually play fucking D&D. Thanks.

You can play fucking D&D, and as far as I can tell often do. What's the problem?

Christ. I'll just ignore these posts until you actually read the whole thread, Sigmund. *SIGH*

Quote from: Mistwell;542682I like the idea of at-will cantrips. For example, prestidigitation and ghost sound, wizards mark and mage hand. Even in most 100% Vancian prior editions these spells were often effectively at will, either due to durations or number of cantrip slots or inexpensive magic items or whatever. And while sometimes creative players could find combat uses for these cantrips, they were primarily for non-combat uses, often to further role playing and color.

I think the issue is a bit different when they include combat spells. What door could hold up to a continual barrage of magic missiles for 10 minutes for example? I think thats where the issue really comes up, with combat spells, rather than the mere concept of some magic being at-will.

This is 99% my stance as well. I would rule, however, (especially if the magic missiles are at-will) that magic missiles only affect living targets ala Shadowrun where the spell is actually harming the target's "aura" or "soul". This, of course, will make me a dick DM in some folk's eyes so I will now preemptively and cordially invite them to never play in one of my games (and I definitely don't mean you Mistwell I'd love to run a game for you).

Quote from: Sigmund;543485This is 99% my stance as well. I would rule, however, (especially if the magic missiles are at-will) that magic missiles only affect living targets ala Shadowrun where the spell is actually harming the target's "aura" or "soul". This, of course, will make me a dick DM in some folk's eyes so I will now preemptively and cordially invite them to never play in one of my games (and I definitely don't mean you Mistwell I'd love to run a game for you).

The at will MM does only target 'creatures' but that adds a lot of confusion and handy wavey ness.

So it can now now used as a creature detector- target places where things might be camoflaged or invisible
Can it target undead
Can it be cast at an animated statue (or chair or handstand) if its not inteligent just animated
will it bypass illusions? Mirror Image
etc
etc
etc

Far easier to just give it a roll to him in my opinion and say it has the force equal to a human punch. So it can target inanimate objects but you need to roll to hit , and it could be used to know down doors but only doors that a normal human punching it woudl knock down and that ain't many doors.
Now it has some flexiblity but it no longer broken.

Quote from: Sigmund;543485This is 99% my stance as well. I would rule, however, (especially if the magic missiles are at-will) that magic missiles only affect living targets ala Shadowrun where the spell is actually harming the target's "aura" or "soul". This, of course, will make me a dick DM in some folk's eyes so I will now preemptively and cordially invite them to never play in one of my games (and I definitely don't mean you Mistwell I'd love to run a game for you).

That's my stance as well if it's an autohit spell. If it's a to roll spell it hits everything in my game. I know it's gamist but I do that to prevent silly spamming. I would include undead/constructs in living if its autohit for simplicity sake. But you could have something akin to disrupt undead as an at-will if you wanted to be more specific but I prefer a far more general approach given I dislike a million situational spells in my game.