tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post9113705499191183859..comments2024-03-28T00:41:13.514-07:00Comments on B/X BLACKRAZOR: A Wizard Worth Playing (Part 3)JBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03263662621289630246noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-65561461772837279002014-07-14T10:29:58.728-07:002014-07-14T10:29:58.728-07:00That makes sense, thanks for the further explanati...That makes sense, thanks for the further explanation.Peter Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-29167277485029185082014-07-12T17:07:31.531-07:002014-07-12T17:07:31.531-07:00@ Peter:
Um...what? Why not just make 10 a little...@ Peter:<br /><br />Um...what? Why not just make 10 a little louder? "But this one goes up to 11!"<br /><br />Dude: what level would wizards have to start at to be able to throw explosive fire and open portals to other worlds? What level would they need to be to animate the dead?<br /><br />[ha! that last question is rhetorical...there's no "animate dead" spell in the Basic Rules! More bogus description!]<br /><br />To me, the "obvious" thing was to rewrite the abilities based on the description, something that really WASN'T much work (the main issue was finding the time to post it...my home life is a little busy). Here's the thing about game design: if you know WHAT you want to model, you're halfway (or more than halfway) there. And really, the different degrees of magnitude are modeled to existing spells found throughout the editions. Check out transmutation, for example: you'll see polymorph (4th), rock to mud (5th), flesh-stone and disintegrate (6th), mordenkainen's sword (7th), polymorph any (8th), and crystal brittle and wish (9th). Easy-shmeesy.<br /><br />If anything, I'm just a snarky bastard: "Hey 5E, I can give you a radical and interesting take on magic in three days, where all you came up with after years of play testing is unlimited laser cantrips. You suck." But it's ALSO a valuable mental exercise and gives me fodder for future projects: I can see doing SOMEthing like this with a magic system in the future (hell, I AM doing something like this, though with fewer "magnitudes"). But if I was really writing something for publication (as opposed to a lark based on a literal reading of the "Basic Rules"), I would probably be more universal in my schools than "meteor swarm" and "animate dead."<br /><br />Oh...just by the way: I have no intention to PLAY 5E, man. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I don't need an "easy fix" or solution to the issue (and for the record, letting wizards start at high levels carries other burdens). I was proposing an "alternate reality."<br />: )JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-88209942907477712432014-07-12T16:11:58.290-07:002014-07-12T16:11:58.290-07:00Maybe I have. I can see you put a lot of work into...Maybe I have. I can see you put a lot of work into this alternate Wizard class. It just seems like the easier way to fulfill the description you quoted in part 1 right out of the gate is to simply start at a level where some, most, or all of things are possible. I get that you want to do it a different way, otherwise you wouldn’t have spent so much time on it. But still I was wondering why you just didn’t go with what seems to be like the obvious solution.Peter Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-29806889228574163202014-07-11T22:02:39.372-07:002014-07-11T22:02:39.372-07:00@ Scott:
It seems less complicated to me that the...@ Scott:<br /><br />It seems less complicated to me that the wizard as written in the Basic rules.<br /><br />@ Peter:<br />Hmm...you may have missed the point, here.JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08532311924539491087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-25077042722341384352014-07-11T12:06:00.037-07:002014-07-11T12:06:00.037-07:00Why not just start at a higher level?
I don't...Why not just start at a higher level?<br /><br />I don't mean that rhetorically. I see the changes make some fundamental changes to wizards . . . but it seems like an easier way to address to concerns of "you should be able to do this out of the gate" is to move the gate position up, so to speak, and start higher level.<br /><br />It's a solution I've used in point-buy systems - you want movie action heroes? Give them more points. Why not give them more levels?Peter Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14246000382321978462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-82835752107774202432014-07-11T11:21:44.096-07:002014-07-11T11:21:44.096-07:00A little complicated for my tastes but it seems li...A little complicated for my tastes but it seems like a good rule set to me. Scott Andersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12067161332003628237noreply@blogger.com