mkkuhner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Mary K. Kuhner) writes:
> In article <ep8a3v$22p$1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, Del Rio <delrio@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
>
> [mouse to whale]
>
> >There's nothing in the system to prevent this kind of thing,
> >and truth be told, I think that in a non-script protected
> >universe, people would make "creative" use of spells like this
> >all the time. (Collapse a cathedral roof through judicious use
> >of Stone to Flesh, anyone?) Sucks for trying to run a serious
> >minded campaign, though.
>
> I don't think the effect is necessarily non-serious; my big
> problem is when the PCs are the first people ever to think of
> this stuff, which is almost invariably the case in published
> settings, and hard to avoid even in your own if the spell
> system is at all complex.
>
> If castles can be taken out by a fairly low level spell, either
> there should be no castles, or defenses should have been developed,
> or people who can do that spell should be under some form of
> societal control. Any of those are fine, but the GM needs to
> know about them!
I can only agree; basically, the world should be 'in equilibrium' with
respect to spells, effects, monsters and whatnot. An efficient market
theory, if you will: the "societal shock" of introducing each spell
etc should already have been accounted for, and/or compensated,
because all the INT 18+ magic-users have already tried their hand at
abusing the spells. The practical difficulty is for the poor GM to
actually implement this equilibrium, of course. (Also, modern RPG
publi****ng seems to thrive on supplements with cool new powers, which
really drive things in the other direction.)
And even if the adventurers were first in abusing polymorph this way,
why doesn't such a fairly simple and useful technique quickly spread,
along with countermeasures (if any)?
Best,
Thomas
--
Thomas Lindgren
"Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try again. Fail again. Fail better."
|
