Difference between revisions of "User talk:Mqs/Greater Eschew Materials"
From Drinking and Dragons
>Mqs m |
Wizardoest (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I don't believe that XP should be Eschewed. How would eschewing GP interact with expensive foci? Would expensive material components be partially reduced, e.g. paying on 400gp for ''Stoneskin''? --<strong>[[User:Wizardoest|Randy]]</strong> ([[User talk:Wizardoest|Talk]]) 18:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | I don't believe that XP should be Eschewed. How would eschewing GP interact with expensive foci? Would expensive material components be partially reduced, e.g. paying on 400gp for ''Stoneskin''? --<strong>[[User:Wizardoest|Randy]]</strong> ([[User talk:Wizardoest|Talk]]) 18:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
:I would not have it affect foci. They are not consumed -- foci have never been a problem for me as a player or that I've heard from others. Partial reduction seems feasible, but I would probably make it all or nothing. In flavor, you need a single 5000 GP diamond -- not misc. diamonds worth up to 5000 GP. (So balance, yes -- partial reduce; flavor and thematically, no -- do not reduce.) --[[User:Mqs|Mqs]] 18:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | :I would not have it affect foci. They are not consumed -- foci have never been a problem for me as a player or that I've heard from others. Partial reduction seems feasible, but I would probably make it all or nothing. In flavor, you need a single 5000 GP diamond -- not misc. diamonds worth up to 5000 GP. (So balance, yes -- partial reduce; flavor and thematically, no -- do not reduce.) --[[User:Mqs|Mqs]] 18:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
::Agree about foci. To decide between a) balance - partial reduction, and b) theme - no reduction, I would need to check out costly material components for spells. If costs fluctuate wildly I would favor option a with the right amount, otherwise I would lean towards option b. --<strong>[[User:Wizardoest|Randy]]</strong> ([[User talk:Wizardoest|Talk]]) 18:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 10:32, 23 July 2009
I don't believe that XP should be Eschewed. How would eschewing GP interact with expensive foci? Would expensive material components be partially reduced, e.g. paying on 400gp for Stoneskin? --Randy (Talk) 18:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- I would not have it affect foci. They are not consumed -- foci have never been a problem for me as a player or that I've heard from others. Partial reduction seems feasible, but I would probably make it all or nothing. In flavor, you need a single 5000 GP diamond -- not misc. diamonds worth up to 5000 GP. (So balance, yes -- partial reduce; flavor and thematically, no -- do not reduce.) --Mqs 18:26, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
- Agree about foci. To decide between a) balance - partial reduction, and b) theme - no reduction, I would need to check out costly material components for spells. If costs fluctuate wildly I would favor option a with the right amount, otherwise I would lean towards option b. --Randy (Talk) 18:32, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
