1) There is no cost involved with making ammunition for ballistas and catapults. Yes, you could size them up from crossbow bolts and from slings, I suppose. I would like to however see that hastily made make-shift items (crudely made logs, putrescent corpses, etc) suffer a -2 to attack, and masterwork ammunition is also available. Likewise, an inclusion of non-sacrificial ammunition, such as blurbs with harpoons with rope/chain is included. (Perhaps in another product, I suppose.)
2) Instead of the text:
Emulate an Ability Score: To cast a spell from a scroll, you need
a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard
spells, Wisdom for divine spells, or Charisma for sorcerer or
bard spells). Your effective ability score (appropriate to the
class you’re emulating when you try to cast the spell from the
scroll) is your Use Magic Device check result minus 15. If you
already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability,
you don’t need to make this check.
It would save space and be clearer to simply state:
Emulate an Ability Score: To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability. Add 15 to the Use Magic Device check if you do not meet the ability score prerequisite.
|
2) Instead of the text:
Emulate an Ability Score: To cast a spell from a scroll, you need
a high score in the appropriate ability (Intelligence for wizard
spells, Wisdom for divine spells, or Charisma for sorcerer or
bard spells). Your effective ability score (appropriate to the
class you’re emulating when you try to cast the spell from the
scroll) is your Use Magic Device check result minus 15. If you
already have a high enough score in the appropriate ability,
you don’t need to make this check.
It would save space and be clearer to simply state:
Emulate an Ability Score: To cast a spell from a scroll, you need a high score in the appropriate ability. Add 15 to the Use Magic Device check if you do not meet the ability score prerequisite.
Why would my UMD check be better if I didn't have the ability pre-req?
; - )Perhaps it would be better to say subtract 15 to the check OR add 15 to the DC of the check?
I like your intention here but after some of the conversations on this board about RAW versus RAI I would rather have an entry that is overly elaborate but specifically clear rather than syntactically simple.
As a for instance: what is the "appropriate" ability? Using your new definition I would have to look that information up somewhere else and one of the issue I have at this point is that in certain circumstances (Uses, pros, cons, of Stealth) I have to look in a bunch of different places. It would seem to me better to repeat yourself for clarity rather than send the reader all over the place.
That said, were there a little more *umph* in the indexing and if "appropriate ability" was a defined term entry in the aback of the book that explained what that meant then I think your idea would be fairly elegant. My .02
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
conversations on this board about RAW versus RAI I would rather have an entry that is overly elaborate but specifically clear rather than syntactically simple
+1 I hate those RAW debates where one side reads it in a "I'm god" way and the other side reads it in a "this makes sense" way.