How would you mark and remember "Today X is my signature spell"?
Your signature spells don't change daily. Put an asterisk next to one spell per spell level in your repertoire. That's your signature spell.
Letting spontaneous casters heighten all their spells freely is a significant power boost that will only get more noticeable at higher levels.
But, hey! It's your game. Do what's fun for you and your group.
You really like spontaneous casters.
Well, fighters as well as champions, barbarians, and monks (with investment) can exert a zone of control as can monsters for whom that is part of their deal. I don't think we need to give AoOs to wizards, hedgehogs, and owlbears to make combat tactical when it should be.
Maybe owlbears. You can make a good case for most melee-based animals having AoO since a lot of them learn to "fight" by hunting for their dinner. That being said, I think the less AoOs the better. It's a major contributing factor in how slow combat was in 3.5/PF1.
I vastly prefer 2e's publish rate to 5e's.
Lord Fyre wrote:
I think it's more of a flavor change than anything. I've wished D&D was on the silver standard since the mid-80s - about the time Matthew Broderick was bragging about having a purse full of copper in Ladyhawke.
It is! Very much so. Thank you.
Where have you been? We hashed this out a year ago.
I found it more useful than the 3rd sheet.
I'm mildly disappointed in the spell sheet. I honestly can't figure out what all the boxes in the "spell slots per day" section are for. And I would have preferred putting innate spells and focus spells somewhere else so non-casters wouldn't use the whole sheet for those little sections. I don't think the magic traditions is needed at all and I wish cantrips were just lumped in with spells in general.
I'm sure there will be a plethora of fan-made sheets in the near future.
EDIT: Just noticed the "spontaneous spell slots remaining" note. Probably would have figured it out if I were making a sorcerer or bard.
This right here is what's wrong with alignment. People can't agree on what the different aspects mean.
Sure it can be useful as a shorthand, but in the end it causes more arguments than it helps to avoid. We only have 35+ years of experience to show this.
The Gleeful Grognard wrote:
The occasional re-roll is nice to have. I usually forget about them at the time I need them though. I'm hoping I can at least think of them if my character's dying.
David knott 242 wrote:
They carry over in Oblivion Oath.
A growing number of folks have their books. Could we please have access to the full version of the character sheet, please?
Captain Morgan wrote:
My first thought when he said this was maybe he was thinking of hero points. I think in Oblivion Oath they're limited to 3, but that may be because they have so many Jason didn't want them spending 5-6 on stabilization rolls. I also seem to remember something being said about a focus power that cost 5 focus at one time.
Or maybe Logan just worded it funny and we're reading too much into it.
Ah. Got it. I thought they had an onsite storefront or something. If they shipped it across the street that's obviously an honest mistake. Who would ship something that close on purpose?
No doubt. I'd say the same thing if I got my books 2 weeks early.
i still don't quite understand how xp works in the new system...the playtest rules didn't explain it well to me and since doomsday dawn didn't award xp i never got to see any examples in action...hopefully the final rules will do a better job of making me understand...
I'm a bit confused about it as well. I was hoping Stephen would go into more detail about that, but it got skipped for juicier parts that would be interesting to more players.
It seems weird to me that it only takes 1000xp per level instead of an increasing amount each level.
Jason's said he's rewritten the whole chapter to be clearer, but that's the only changes I've heard of.
You may be right. I guess we'll find out in about 4 weeks.
Landon Winkler wrote:
Do you feel the same way about characters moving more than once in a turn? How about casting more than one spell? Making more than one first aid check? Retrieving more than one item from their pack?
Martial characters *strike.* It's what they do. So why penalize them (and only them) for doing it more than once a turn?
That's weird cuz they missed 5e's three best features: No penalties for iterative attacks and finally killing off alignment and fire-and-forget spellcasting.
Rek Rollington wrote:
I wonder how this will look when they release the optional "no alignment" rules.
I really, really hope that Paizo makes available a black/white printer-friendly PDF version of that character sheet. The one in this blog post has so many coloured areas, which uses way too much ink/toner and makes them useless for writing in remarks and the like. :(
I guess it's coming. Even if it doesn't I'm sure there'll be a ton of fan-made sheets out there.