SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

The 5e Wizard...initiate thy worship or thy fury!!

Started by Spinachcat, June 29, 2014, 01:51:15 AM

Previous topic - Next topic
Print
Go Down Pages 1 ... 18 19 20 21
User actions

Warthur

#285
July 04, 2014, 06:27:05 AM
Quote from: Brander;764269I just noticed in the Basic pdf that you can use a spellcasting focus in lieu of material components that do not have a cost and are not consumed upon casting.  That's news to me.
I think that's a fair compromise. It means you don't have to be a wizard who carries around pouches of random trash unless you particularly want that flavour, it means you can still deprive the wizard of being able to cast those spells (taking away the focus being tantamount to taking away the material components), and in general if a material component is free and isn't consumed on casting I think that's a clear sign that it isn't really intended to be a barrier to spellcasting except under special circumstances.

Plus it opens the door to clever wizard players MacGuyvering their way out of being captured if they can work out a way to get some of those apparently-innocuous material components.
I am no longer posting here or reading this forum because Pundit has regularly claimed credit for keeping this community active. I am sick of his bullshit for reasons I explain here and I don\'t want to contribute to anything he considers to be a personal success on his part.

I recommend The RPG Pub as a friendly place where RPGs can be discussed and where the guiding principles of moderation are "be kind to each other" and "no politics". It\'s pretty chill so far.

estar

#286
July 04, 2014, 08:40:27 AM
Looks like the worry about jailing wizards is moot. Like many D&D editions, spells require Verbal, Somatic, or Material components. Chain the archmage up. Hannibal Lecter style, he isn't doing squat.

estar

#287
July 04, 2014, 08:42:06 AM
Quote from: Brander;764269I just noticed in the Basic pdf that you can use a spellcasting focus in lieu of material components that do not have a cost and are not consumed upon casting.  That's news to me.

Or a Component Bag. However components with a cost have to be purchased and tracked separately.

Warthur

#288
July 04, 2014, 08:53:55 AM
Quote from: estar;764328Looks like the worry about jailing wizards is moot. Like many D&D editions, spells require Verbal, Somatic, or Material components. Chain the archmage up. Hannibal Lecter style, he isn't doing squat.
I am amused by how many people in this thread seem to think that "manacles plus a gag" would be beyond the capability of most jailers.
I am no longer posting here or reading this forum because Pundit has regularly claimed credit for keeping this community active. I am sick of his bullshit for reasons I explain here and I don\'t want to contribute to anything he considers to be a personal success on his part.

I recommend The RPG Pub as a friendly place where RPGs can be discussed and where the guiding principles of moderation are "be kind to each other" and "no politics". It\'s pretty chill so far.

mcbobbo

#289
July 04, 2014, 08:59:26 AM
Quote from: Warthur;764332I am amused by how many people in this thread seem to think that "manacles plus a gag" would be beyond the capability of most jailers.

It's just not practical for long term storage.  Bed sores and the like.  He's going to die without constant and disgusting care.  Particularly in an age without antibiotics.  I suppose you could have a cleric come by and heal him every day to keep him alive...

The oubliette is better.
"It is the mark of an [intelligent] mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

jadrax

#290
July 04, 2014, 09:00:11 AM
Quote from: Warthur;764332I am amused by how many people in this thread seem to think that "manacles plus a gag" would be beyond the capability of most jailers.

Look, The Gaolers' Guild charter insist that you always lock up PCs unrestrained and with all their gear, in the only cell with a secret passage that leads further into the complex. It's the rules!

JonWake

#291
July 04, 2014, 01:43:14 PM
Quote from: jadrax;764336Look, The Gaolers' Guild charter insist that you always lock up PCs unrestrained and with all their gear, in the only cell with a secret passage that leads further into the complex. It's the rules!

Gone to the Elder Scrolls School of Gaoling, I see.

mcbobbo

#292
July 04, 2014, 01:51:45 PM
Now that I have the rules,  I have noticed another problem with 'tunnel via cantrip' - they all explicitly say 'creature'.  By strict reading, they have no effect on non-creatures.

Not sure if that was intended or not, but there's at least one 1st level spell that's not worded that way.
"It is the mark of an [intelligent] mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

jadrax

#293
July 04, 2014, 02:15:01 PM
Quote from: mcbobbo;764486Now that I have the rules,  I have noticed another problem with 'tunnel via cantrip' - they all explicitly say 'creature'.  By strict reading, they have no effect on non-creatures.

Not sure if that was intended or not, but there's at least one 1st level spell that's not worded that way.

I am not sure if objects take Hit Point damage in 5e?

I notice the fire spells just set objects alight rather than doing damage to them.

Exploderwizard

#294
July 04, 2014, 02:32:53 PM
Quote from: mcbobbo;764486Now that I have the rules,  I have noticed another problem with 'tunnel via cantrip' - they all explicitly say 'creature'.  By strict reading, they have no effect on non-creatures.

Not sure if that was intended or not, but there's at least one 1st level spell that's not worded that way.

Fitrebolt says creature or object but ray of frost and shocking grasp explicirly says creature.
Quote from: JonWakeGamers, as a whole, are much like primitive cavemen when confronted with a new game. Rather than \'oh, neat, what\'s this do?\', the reaction is to decide if it\'s a sex hole, then hit it with a rock.

Quote from: Old Geezer;724252At some point it seems like D&D is going to disappear up its own ass.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;766997In the randomness of the dice lies the seed for the great oak of creativity and fun. The great virtue of the dice is that they come without boxed text.

Marleycat

#295
July 04, 2014, 02:52:41 PM
Quote from: mcbobbo;764486Now that I have the rules,  I have noticed another problem with 'tunnel via cantrip' - they all explicitly say 'creature'.  By strict reading, they have no effect on non-creatures.

Not sure if that was intended or not, but there's at least one 1st level spell that's not worded that way.

That wasn't intentional trust me. And go and start a big fire in your cell no one will ever find out.
Don\'t mess with cats we kill wizards in one blow.;)

jeff37923

#296
July 04, 2014, 02:59:43 PM
Quote from: mcbobbo;764486Now that I have the rules,  I have noticed another problem with 'tunnel via cantrip' - they all explicitly say 'creature'.  By strict reading, they have no effect on non-creatures.

Not sure if that was intended or not, but there's at least one 1st level spell that's not worded that way.

Smartass Twink Player-

"I aim the cantrip at that cockroach on the wall over there."
"Meh."

jadrax

#297
July 04, 2014, 02:59:55 PM
Quote from: Exploderwizard;764499Fitrebolt says creature or object but ray of frost and shocking grasp explicirly says creature.

Yeah, it is madly inconsistent.

Magic Missile, Force Damage, just says creature
Mordenkainen's Sword, Force Damage, just says target

Marleycat

#298
July 04, 2014, 03:05:25 PM Last Edit: July 04, 2014, 03:09:12 PM by Marleycat
Quote from: jadrax;764515Yeah, it is madly inconsistent.

Magic Missile, Force Damage, just says creature
Mordenkainen’s Sword, Force Damage, just says target

Again because magic missile isn't supposed to be used like a siege weapon and Mordenkainen's Sword is functionally a sword.
Don\'t mess with cats we kill wizards in one blow.;)

Omega

#299
July 04, 2014, 03:05:30 PM
Quote from: jeff37923;764514Smartass Twink Player-

"I aim the cantrip at that cockroach on the wall over there."

Smartass DM: "Well that roach sure is dead......." :cool:
Print
Go Up Pages 1 ... 18 19 20 21
User actions