Well, I definitely don't want to castrate anybody.
Sorry, I meant "radius". So the d20/3.x version is 10' radius, BF 30'.
You make a good point about the relative strengths of first level magic users in modern games as opposed to BFRPG. I hadn't considered that.
I am, however, using a few optional rules to buff first level magic users (arcane bolt three times a day, INT bonus grants extra spells.) I also use inherent Read Magic, in addition to allowing the first level magic user to choose his own starting spells. Maybe all this is why I am not as sympathetic to his weakness as you are!
Anyhow, I appreciate the help and the input. I will have to mull over how I'll play the Sleep spell in my campaign. Thanks for the food for thought!
Sleep spell no limit on HD affected?
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:57 am
Re: Sleep spell no limit on HD affected?
I also like games that use optional rules to buff first level magic users. I don't really like the arcane bolt, but I do like using INT bonus to grants extra spells. And to be honest, I have never played in a game where a DM treated the Read Magic spell as an actual spell. It was just something MUs use to read magic, ie Inherent. I also hate it when a DM picks my spells rather than letting me choose my own starting spells. I also like using orisons and cantrips (0 level spells).
But I think you misunderstood my point, I am not sympathetic to a first level MU's weakness. In my opinion they should be weak so that players can learn that MU's are not fighters and should not be played like a fighter with a spell book. They should be played like the smartest guy in the room who prefers to get his way with brains rather than brawn. I was just pointing out the difference in power level between the old school MU and the modern MU as a reason why Sleep might be less powerful in a modern game. I also think that the other classes are also much weaker than their equivalents in modern games so they have a much greater need for a MU with a Sleep grenade that they have to protect for the entire first level.
But I think you misunderstood my point, I am not sympathetic to a first level MU's weakness. In my opinion they should be weak so that players can learn that MU's are not fighters and should not be played like a fighter with a spell book. They should be played like the smartest guy in the room who prefers to get his way with brains rather than brawn. I was just pointing out the difference in power level between the old school MU and the modern MU as a reason why Sleep might be less powerful in a modern game. I also think that the other classes are also much weaker than their equivalents in modern games so they have a much greater need for a MU with a Sleep grenade that they have to protect for the entire first level.
-
- Posts: 30
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2014 8:57 am
Re: Sleep spell no limit on HD affected?
Well, by "sympathetic" to the magic user's weakness I was referring to your earlier point that BF MUs need a more powerful Sleep spell due to their inferiority to modern MUs; my point was that since I buff the BF MU a bit, that might work to (at least partially) close the power gap between old-school and modern MUs (and hence attenuate the necessity for a more powerful Sleep spell.)
You know what? I've never played in a game where Read Magic was treated as a spell either, haha. I guess most folks use that "optional" rule without even considering it as such.
You know what? I've never played in a game where Read Magic was treated as a spell either, haha. I guess most folks use that "optional" rule without even considering it as such.
Re: Sleep spell no limit on HD affected?
I think we are on the same wavelength. Just wanted to point out again that the entire party in an old school game is weaker than a modern party. The sleep spell has saved many a group from a TPK. And nearly every TPK I have been involved in came when the MU had either used or didn't prepare the sleep spell.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 39 guests