Every GM is eventually going to run into a spellcaster-playing wiseguy intent on doing whatever he can to avoid as much as possible and to make the game as boring for everyone else as his self-serving ego can manage.
This very boring, often self-satisfied individual will use teleport to get around as many barriers, puzzles, riddles, and encounters as he can.
You aren't his father, so you can't punish him. And even though he deserves a punch in the face for this, and everybody here knows it, there is a distinct lack of cajones here big enough to admit to it. (But at least don't lie to yourselves tonight when you're lying awake knowing how right I am.)
One cure for this sort of thing, including other game gimpers like the aforementioned rope trick, etc. (which is not a problem to me as I detest random night encounters, having suffered a DM in the long ago who rolled a 50% chance per hour for one every night in-game), is to provide relatively intelligent recurring baddies who learn quickly that the PC(s) in question is/are a one-trick pony, and prepare reasonably for it next time.
However, I have found the best cure to this is simple peer pressure. Lessening challenge, not getting to solve the riddle, missing out on needed information, and losing out on XP will eventually bother the more reasonable players to the point where they start leaning on the gimper to knock it off.
I just want to clarify here: you believe players deserve to be physically assaulted because they're playing their characters intelligently?
Well, here's my 'man card.' Clearly I have no cojones, because I think that sounds insane.
When my players stormed the castle of the evil queen, the wizard was able to sneak in ahead in shadow form and cast Guards and Wards, effectively eliminating the chance of encountering random patrols, and then, since they had the layout of the castle, they dimension doored right to the throne room. The nature of their mission meant they still had to clear out the rest of the castle, and I could easily have Dimension Locked the throne room and stopped the teleportation if I wanted to, but it was a sound tactical choice which I applauded. I certainly had no urge to punch my player.
Every GM is eventually going to run into a spellcaster-playing wiseguy intent on doing whatever he can to avoid as much as possible and to make the game as boring for everyone else as his self-serving ego can manage.
This very boring, often self-satisfied individual will use teleport to get around as many barriers, puzzles, riddles, and encounters as he can.
You aren't his father, so you can't punish him. And even though he deserves a punch in the face for this, and everybody here knows it, there is a distinct lack of cajones here big enough to admit to it. (But at least don't lie to yourselves tonight when you're lying awake knowing how right I am.)
One cure for this sort of thing, including other game gimpers like the aforementioned rope trick, etc. (which is not a problem to me as I detest random night encounters, having suffered a DM in the long ago who rolled a 50% chance per hour for one every night in-game), is to provide relatively intelligent recurring baddies who learn quickly that the PC(s) in question is/are a one-trick pony, and prepare reasonably for it next time.
However, I have found the best cure to this is simple peer pressure. Lessening challenge, not getting to solve the riddle, missing out on needed information, and losing out on XP will eventually bother the more reasonable players to the point where they start leaning on the gimper to knock it off.
I will never understand why certain people insist on playing D&D.
How to Fix D&D (by DMs who hate D&D), 1.0:
1) Remove all utility spells. Especially those that let you move through space, dimensions, or allow you to have a secure shelter.
2) Remove all AoE spells that have duration greater than instantaneous.
3) Remove all spells that make a target helpless or convey any other negative condition.
Every GM is eventually going to run into a spellcaster-playing wiseguy intent on doing whatever he can to avoid as much as possible and to make the game as boring for everyone else as his self-serving ego can manage.
This very boring, often self-satisfied individual will use teleport to get around as many barriers, puzzles, riddles, and encounters as he can.
You aren't his father, so you can't punish him. And even though he deserves a punch in the face for this, and everybody here knows it, there is a distinct lack of cajones here big enough to admit to it. (But at least don't lie to yourselves tonight when you're lying awake knowing how right I am.)
One cure for this sort of thing, including other game gimpers like the aforementioned rope trick, etc. (which is not a problem to me as I detest random night encounters, having suffered a DM in the long ago who rolled a 50% chance per hour for one every night in-game), is to provide relatively intelligent recurring baddies who learn quickly that the PC(s) in question is/are a one-trick pony, and prepare reasonably for it next time.
However, I have found the best cure to this is simple peer pressure. Lessening challenge, not getting to solve the riddle, missing out on needed information, and losing out on XP will eventually bother the more reasonable players to the point where they start leaning on the gimper to knock it off.
So you advocate a punishing a player who uses his Wizard PC in an effective and appropriate way all within the boundaries of the rule set?
Do you set Rust Monsters on all the fighters because they wear pesky metal armour to raise AC? Make all traps a DC40 to find because where is the fun in the rogue using his skills or do we houserule something nerfing sneak attack? All mindless undead are houseruled neutral to nerf channelling and smite? Or is it just Wizard hate that I see.Your post is made more ironic as the next one you state that punishing players is bad!
I will NEVER understand the need by some GMs to punish players for actually using what they know for it's intended purpose. That would be like a state trooper pulling you over & giving a ticket for safe driving.I will NEVER understand the need by some PEOPLE WITH RSI* to go on and rant without understanding the original post. That would be like a state trooper pulling you over & giving a ticket because he can't do otherwise.
*Reading skill imperment
#2 Rope trick
That one sounds silly but let’s look at it. The night comes up then caster Joe goes on with rope trick!
The result is no more chance for the “iconic” nightly random encounter to occur.
That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created. I think that's all anyone needs to read or understand.
|
It may shock the average poster to these forums that the GM also should have some fun, rather than being forced to work as a slave for players constantly metagaming through every situation. But the GM has to have fun, too, or there is no reason to be playing....
God bless you or whatever being make you happy!
That was the only intention of my post... finding a way to balance player skills and right to use what they have at their disposal VS me having some fun with some random factors!But yeah average Joe, especially those who never bother to DM, can't realy grasp the idea.
The DM's job, contrary to minority belief, is not to amuse himself at the expense of the players.
|
God bless you or whatever being make you happy!
That was the only intention of my post... finding a way to balance player skills and right to use what they have at their disposal VS me having some fun with some random factors!But yeah average Joe, especially those who never bother to DM, can't realy grasp the idea.
You are the GM. If you still don't like the spell despite the weaknesses and enemy counters laid out in this thread, ban it.
Don't complain about it to people you'll never play with.
The DM's job, contrary to minority belief, is not to amuse himself at the expense of the players.
Lies. All lies
The DM's job, contrary to minority belief, is not to amuse himself at the expense of the players.
The adversarial DM is an old concept. Of course too much of something is a bad thing, but every once in a while it's justified. If the PCs move beyond lines in the sand drawn by the campaign world, sometimes the FFF (fickle finger of . . . frack?) must come down. Either the PCs must deal with the consequences of crossing the line. . . or they don't cross the lines.
But yes, it's flat-out bad adventure design to be continually foiled by rope trick. . . or sleet storm for that matter.
which is not a problem to me as I detest random night encounters, having suffered a DM in the long ago who rolled a 50% chance per hour for one every night in-game
Wow. I don't think I could sit through one session of that. . . .
The DM's job, contrary to minority belief, is not to amuse himself at the expense of the players.
Agreed
I always believed a GM's job was to be a neutral story teller/interpreter of the rules and to try and make the game "fun" for all involved.
I see I was wrong and that what I should be doing is hitting players hard for using the rules set as designed...
That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created.
Note that the duration of the AD&D version of Rope Trick was significantly shorter, making it less useful for sleeping in. It was more of a "hide from the guards" or "climb up the sheer wall" sort of spell, IMO.
Spells like teleport, sleet storm, and rope trick basically ruin the game in my opinion. Spells like sleet storm and rope trick are not only boring but also silly.
I agree, and I think pointy eared creatures are also silly, which is why I ban elves, halflings and orcs in my fantasy games. Dwarves and gnomes too because they are patently silly.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
To the OP...
For the first two spells, is turnabout fair play?
For example, have the PCs ever been ambushed by a sleet storm? Or have they ever come across a rope trick just sitting there? Toss those at them and gauge their reactions. Sauce for the goose and all of that.
General:
All this 'The GM shouldn't be against the players' stuff. You're forgetting, the players and the GM are there to have fun. If one party isn't, there's an issue to be resolved. It may be the DM has fun making challenging encounters, and then the players have fun beating them. It may be doing the 'funny voices' for NPCs. If the GM isn't having fun, then why is he bothering to prep?
Edit: As to call lightning, think Storm (the X-man) indoors. Maybe the call lightning spell creates a small localized effect indoors. (Picture the 1 round casting time kicking up a small bit of wind, the air gets dry, small sparks form...)
That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created.Note that the duration of the AD&D version of Rope Trick was significantly shorter, making it less useful for sleeping in. It was more of a "hide from the guards" or "climb up the sheer wall" sort of spell, IMO.
Hiding from guards isn't the same thing as avoiding random encounters?
|
|
The DM's job, contrary to minority belief, is not to amuse himself at the expense of the players.
Emphasis mine.
One thing people often forget is that the DM is a player, too. If he's not having fun, if he's not amused, then the party is failing him no less than he's failing the party if THEY'RE not amused and having fun. Trying my best to screw the player characters is fun for me; trying their best to screw my encounters is fun for my group. But we do it within the confines and rules established by the system we're using. This is why I don't have any problems with the players in this thread having discovered a handful of spells that disrupt what seems to be their DM's standard bag of tricks. I think the question shouldn't be about removing this advantage, so that he can get back to midnight encounters and open field set-pieces, it should be coming up with new approaches to screwing the player characters (NOT the players).
That said, it does sound like the DM is not having fun anymore. He needs to figure out WHY, and if it's ultimately something coming from HIM, or if the players aren't living up to their end of the bargain.
The players job is to play the game along with the GM. If the GM isn't being adversarial, neither should the player.The DM's job, contrary to minority belief, is not to amuse himself at the expense of the players.Agreed
I always believed a GM's job was to be a neutral story teller/interpreter of the rules and to try and make the game "fun" for all involved.
I see I was wrong and that what I should be doing is hitting players hard for using the rules set as designed...
Are you accusing players of being adversarial for using spells or other abilities available to them for the purposes those spells or abilities are intended to be used?
Hiding from guards isn't the same thing as avoiding random encounters?That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created.Note that the duration of the AD&D version of Rope Trick was significantly shorter, making it less useful for sleeping in. It was more of a "hide from the guards" or "climb up the sheer wall" sort of spell, IMO.
Hiding from two hours' worth of random encounters is not the same thing as avoiding eight hours' worth of random encounters (where eight hours is a magic number in D&D).
To the OP...
For the first two spells, is turnabout fair play?
For example, have the PCs ever been ambushed by a sleet storm? Or have they ever come across a rope trick just sitting there? Toss those at them and gauge their reactions. Sauce for the goose and all of that.
General:
All this 'The GM shouldn't be against the players' stuff. You're forgetting, the players and the GM are there to have fun. If one party isn't, there's an issue to be resolved. It may be the DM has fun making challenging encounters, and then the players have fun beating them. It may be doing the 'funny voices' for NPCs. If the GM isn't having fun, then why is he bothering to prep?Edit: As to call lightning, think Storm (the X-man) indoors. Maybe the call lightning spell creates a small localized effect indoors. (Picture the 1 round casting time kicking up a small bit of wind, the air gets dry, small sparks form...)
If the GM is obviously going to be a dick, I don't care if he is having fun or not. See MULTIPLE people in this thread who I don't care if they have fun as the DM or not. If they aren't having fun not being jerks, I would much prefer they cease being DMs entirely.
Hiding from two hours' worth of random encounters is not the same thing as avoiding eight hours' worth of random encounters (where eight hours is the magic number in D&D).Hiding from guards isn't the same thing as avoiding random encounters?That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created.Note that the duration of the AD&D version of Rope Trick was significantly shorter, making it less useful for sleeping in. It was more of a "hide from the guards" or "climb up the sheer wall" sort of spell, IMO.
Rope Trick is 1 hr/level. You have to be level 4 and use an Extend Spell to get it to last 8 hours.
|
|
Hiding from guards isn't the same thing as avoiding random encounters?
Depends on the context. Are the PCs escaping a dungeon (a real dungeon, not these underground murderplexes that many adventures happen in), or trying to break into a treasure vault? Then hiding from the guards is a great way to build tension without combat - will the passing guard notice the rope dangling in the corner of the chamber? What if the guard meets another guard and has a little chat right below your extradimensional space, and the spell's duration is about to expire? It can be very cinematic, hiding from guards.
If the guards only ever appear when the die roll and table say some guards appear, and you're not entirely sure why there even ARE guards in the murderplex, then yes, by definition, you're avoiding the random encounter. And using less than your tactically predefined percentage of party resources to do so.
Last I checked, the change to prevent the rope from being pulled into the space was made by Paizo. You can't mix and match editions for an argument.
Anyone who makes a rope trick in the middle of a main hall deserves to fall on some guards.
Infinite rope trick of perfect mysteries: Find a servant's pull bell rope or curtain ropes. Cut it at the top. Cast Rope Trick such that the rope rises to where it should be. Hidden in plain sight, no one investigates random rope.
|
|
I had a big smile inside when I read your post because if you combine it with my other favorite rule: capping level advancement at 6th, it makes Pathfinder the perfect game.How to Fix D&D (by DMs who hate D&D), 1.0:
1) Remove all utility spells. Especially those that let you move through space, dimensions, or allow you to have a secure shelter.
2) Remove all AoE spells that have duration greater than instantaneous.
3) Remove all spells that make a target helpless.
Why the heck are you even playing pathfinder for god's sake?
What is the point of playing a game without the things that make it that game?Do you play soccer barefoot, or basketball with boxing gloves? No you do not.
|
|
Are you accusing players of being adversarial for using spells or other abilities available to them for the purposes those spells or abilities are intended to be used?
The players job is to play the game along with the GM. If the GM isn't being adversarial, neither should the player.
I think we all need more context before we accuse anyone of being adversarial towards anyone else.
Cartigan is right about players using the spells for the purposes they were intended doing exactly what they're supposed to do.
Spacelard is right that if the party is coming to the encounter as if it were a tactical exercise, and the DM is running it as a cinematic scene, then there *is* a problem in the total fun at the table. If the DM knows the party prefers tactical exercises, and deliberately runs a cinematic, but non-optimal, encounter, he's being adversarial. If the DM explicitly states he's looking to recreate the feel of scenes from a movie, sub-optimal decisions and all, and the party steps up and orchestrates a response that would make the SAS envious, they're being adversarial.
If there's no communication going on at the table and everybody's b+*~#ing and moaning but not actively working with the rest of the group to solve the problem of not everyone at the table having fun, then this conversation, right here and now, is not addressing the actual problem at all.
I had a big smile inside when I read your post because if you combine it with my other favorite rule: capping level advancement at 6th, it makes Pathfinder the perfect game.How to Fix D&D (by DMs who hate D&D), 1.0:
1) Remove all utility spells. Especially those that let you move through space, dimensions, or allow you to have a secure shelter.
2) Remove all AoE spells that have duration greater than instantaneous.
3) Remove all spells that make a target helpless.Why the heck are you even playing pathfinder for god's sake?
What is the point of playing a game without the things that make it that game?
Do you play soccer barefoot, or basketball with boxing gloves? No you do not.
I play basketball by trying to hurl a bowling ball through American football uprights.
If the DM explicitly states he's looking to recreate the feel of scenes from a movie, sub-optimal decisions and all, and the party steps up and orchestrates a response that would make the SAS envious, they're being adversarial.
Then the DM isn't looking to play a game with real players. He wants to orchestrate a play.
Hiding from two hours' worth of random encounters is not the same thing as avoiding eight hours' worth of random encounters (where eight hours is the magic number in D&D).Rope Trick is 1 hr/level. You have to be level 4 and use an Extend Spell to get it to last 8 hours.
...and that's clearly what the original poster's players were doing with it. That wasn't possible until much higher levels in AD&D (shorter duration and no cheap way of extending spells).
|
|
If the DM explicitly states he's looking to recreate the feel of scenes from a movie, sub-optimal decisions and all, and the party steps up and orchestrates a response that would make the SAS envious, they're being adversarial.Then the DM isn't looking to play a game with real players. He wants to orchestrate a play.
I'm trying to decide if you're saying that players who have their characters respond like characters, rather than tokens in a tactical exercise, aren't real players; or if you're saying that GMs that don't want to run a game like it's final fantasy with "plot" and "combat" as two entirely different games are in denial of reality.
Either way, that's the one-true-way, kind-of-a-dick Cartigan I've come to expect around here. My world is set to right again.
|
Then the DM isn't looking to play a game with real players. He wants to orchestrate a play.
And Cartigan once again demonstrates his complete inability to concieve of anyone playing with a style of play that differs from his own. Do you actually play this game, or do you just come here to condemn people that do play it for not doing it "the Cartigan way"?
If the DM explicitly states he's looking to recreate the feel of scenes from a movie, sub-optimal decisions and all, and the party steps up and orchestrates a response that would make the SAS envious, they're being adversarial.Then the DM isn't looking to play a game with real players. He wants to orchestrate a play.I'm trying to decide if you're saying that players who have their characters respond like characters, rather than tokens in a tactical exercise, aren't real players; or if you're saying that GMs that don't want to run a game like it's final fantasy with "plot" and "combat" as two entirely different games are in denial of reality.
Either way, [b]that's[/i] the one-true-way, kind-of-a-dick Cartigan I've come to expect around here. My world is set to right again.
My point is that movie/show plots are movie/show plots. They are entirely contrived to have X outcome, whether organic or not. If you want a scenario to be carried out the exact way it was in the movie, you are rail-roading your players and are being a jerk, if you don't and you think they are being adversarial by not acting how you want them to act then you are a delusional jerk.
A full half of all sci-fi plots can be solved by the tech they have available to them but don't use because it wouldn't be an hour long show. Characters with certain abilities are not going to NOT use those abilities to solve the problem regardless of how much you want them to or what the characters in the show/movie did.
Then the DM isn't looking to play a game with real players. He wants to orchestrate a play.And Cartigan once again demonstrates his complete inability to concieve of anyone playing with a style of play that differs from his own. Do you actually play this game, or do you just come here to condemn people that do play it for not doing it "the Cartigan way"?
Yes, the Cartigan way - a game run by a DM accepting of the fact that no matter how hard he contrives something to work a certain way, it will almost never happen.
Read this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/ForgottenPhlebotinumThe only way that will EVER work in D&D is if all players forget one player can just blow a hole in the wall/travel miles instantly/create something from nothing.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
And Cartigan once again demonstrates his complete inability to concieve of anyone playing with a style of play that differs from his own. Do you actually play this game, or do you just come here to condemn people that do play it for not doing it "the Cartigan way"?
I've just decided to ignore him. There's no point in trying to argue with a goal post moving, straw man burning acolyte of the 'one true way'.
|
|
If you want a scenario to be carried out the exact way
Stop, pause, breathe. I said if one wants a scenario to feel like a TV show or movie, not play out exactly like one.
Role-playing, at it's heart, is, basically, a kid watching Ghostbusters and saying, "Oh, man. I wish *I* could have been there, because *I* would've done *this* and then said something much cooler than Venkmann did." Some kids would do something that would have been so much smarter to do, fixing the problem and keeping New York from being attacked by monsters, but it would've stopped the film 20 minutes in. And they LIKE that, because they like solving problems and coming out on top. That's fun for them. OTHER kids, they might have done something crazier or dumber or funnier that would have taken the film in a whole different direction and caused DIFFERENT problems. They like interacting with the toys and seeing where the ride takes them if they do something unexpected.
When the first kids start yelling at the second kids for not doing the obviously smart thing to do, and the second kids start yelling back "but that's what my character would DOOOOOOOOO" and people stop having fun, there's a problem. It's nobody's fault that different people like different things. It's everybody's fault if they can't compromise or agree to stop playing with each other for the benefit of everyone's fun.
A full half of all sci-fi plots can be solved by the tech they have available to them
Just as many fantasy RPG plots can be solved by the spells the party has available to them, but if they use them right off, you don't have a four to six hour gaming session.
Just as Star Trek ignores that they have transporters until it's fun and exciting to solve a problem with transporters, why is it so wrong to ask D&D wizards to ignore that they have teleport without error until it's fun and exciting to solve a problem with teleport without error? If you're there to win, then you are correct - it makes no sense to ignore your list of spells to solve the problem before you in the most efficient way possible. If you're there to tell an interesting story and maybe even have fun losing sometimes, especially if you lost or had a difficult time because you acted in a way that amused everyone at the table and maybe even showed off some of your awesome character's personality, then not going immediately to the best spell or the best combat tactics for the situation is the way to go.
Rope trick never gave me much trouble, as I've generally always found random nighttime encounters to be a tedious addition to the already-scheduled action of the planned adventure; to me, their only purpose is to a) eat up game time when you're not as prepared as you'd like to be for the session, and/or b) force the PC's to operate at a diminished capacity for a set period of time (which will always feel like an undeserved punishment to the players unless you have a solid reason for depriving them of their abilities).
The spell that's giving me the most trouble right now is wind walk; my PC's have gotten into the habit of using it as a catch-all utility to bypass enemies & traps (even entire dungeons), etc. Most of the ways I can think of to counter it feel contrived to me, but since the current campaign is almost over it's not going to be an issue again for quite some time.
Players who run casters will always be thinking of creative new ways to apply their spells, & for the most part I have no interest in penalizing them for doing so, unless it genuinely threatens game balance. Back in the day I had a problem with the combination of levitate and summon swarm (back when an unwilling target could be levitated); when the player first thought of it in a battle against a major villain, I thought it was a clever spell combo so I allowed for it. Unfortunately, the player then began to use it at every possible opportunity, against enemies who had no defense against it. I finally had to rule that the PC was risking an alignment shift as his opponents were essentially helpless (the vast majority of the time) & therefore the spell combo could be construed as torture. Fortunately, it's a rare occurrence when I have to resort to such a heavy-handed response.
Just as many fantasy RPG plots can be solved by the spells the party has available to them, but if they use them right off, you don't have a four to six hour gaming session.
Uh no, they wouldn't have 4 to 6 hour gaming sessions because their DM wasn't prepared for some one to Fly across a chasm.
Just as Star Trek ignores that they have transporters until it's fun and exciting to solve a problem with transporters, why is it so wrong to ask D&D wizards to ignore that they have teleport without error until it's fun and exciting to solve a problem with teleport without error?
I thought you were advocating acting as the characters would act, not how players making a concentrated, orchestrated effort would act? Why WOULDN'T the Wizard just use Teleport Without Error? Because the guy playing the Wizard thinks that would spoil the fun? Role-playing does not mean "Player running his character like a bleeding moron."
This is why "role-players" and "tactical miniature gamers" don't get along. Role-players seem to be possessed by the idea that their character NEVER does the most logical and obvious thing to do regardless of their intelligence or experience.
|
Hiding from guards isn't the same thing as avoiding random encounters?That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created.Note that the duration of the AD&D version of Rope Trick was significantly shorter, making it less useful for sleeping in. It was more of a "hide from the guards" or "climb up the sheer wall" sort of spell, IMO.
It had a few uses - hiding from guards for a short time or getting up to a higher elevation were two of them.
If wasn't NOVA + Rope Trick = Motel 6, rinse repeat. That was a 3rd edition invention. The 2nd ed version was 20 minutes a level, not even effective for avoiding nightly random encounters.
Hiding from guards isn't the same thing as avoiding random encounters?That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created.Note that the duration of the AD&D version of Rope Trick was significantly shorter, making it less useful for sleeping in. It was more of a "hide from the guards" or "climb up the sheer wall" sort of spell, IMO.It had a few uses - hiding from guards for a short time or getting up to a higher elevation were two of them.
If wasn't NOVA + Rope Trick = Motel 6, rinse repeat. That was a 3rd edition invention. The 2nd ed version was 20 minutes a level, not even effective for avoiding nightly random encounters.
Despite the irritating insistence to take the game back to the days where nostalgia runs wild, Pathfinder kept the third edition version and it has been the third edition version for what? 11 years?
Rope Trick is 1 hr/level. You have to be level 4 and use an Extend Spell to get it to last 8 hours.
I'd like to know how you're Extending a Rope Trick as a 4th level Wizard without sinking exactly half of your "WBL" on the Lesser Rod of Extend.
At 5th level that changes of course, but you're burning one of your two 3rd level spell slots OR burning a full third of your "WBL" on that aforementioned rod.
It's sure not your Arcane Bond, since you cannot have a rod as an arcane bond item.
|
|
That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created. I think that's all anyone needs to read or understand.
The battle for dullard city never ends....
Yes, for what the spell was created - what was that, 33 years ago?
Please stop trying to move the goal posts. The spell existed for many years (22) at 20 min /level and was never a problem till wotc made it part of the nova cycle by expanding its duration.
You want to talk about intent - the “exact purpose it was created", then you need to go back to the "exact purpose it was created" for.
That is the exact purpose of Rope Trick. You are complaining about a spell being used for the exact purpose it was created. I think that's all anyone needs to read or understand.The battle for dullard city never ends....
Yes, for what the spell was created - what was that, 33 years ago?
Please stop trying to move the goal posts. The spell existed for many years (22) at 20 min /level and was never a problem till wotc made it part of the nova cycle by expanding its duration.
You want to talk about intent - the “exact purpose it was created", then you need to go back to the "exact purpose it was created" for.
Was it created in 2e or first edition? If the former, then it was only like that for as long as it hasn't been. And that separation will only increase in favor of NOT being like that.