Difference between revisions of "Talk:Better Counterspelling (3.5e Variant Rule)"
From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
(Created page with '== Playtesting Note == Ghostwheel had the following idea in chat: <Ghostwheel> Could be *noddish* Perhaps make it a CL check, both sides getting a bonus equal to 2x the s…') |
(→Playtesting Note) |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
I think right now that's making it too hard for the attacker as they already have to draw line of effect through them in the first place and hit the spell with the attack of opportunity, but it might be an appropriate idea. That's something whose answer will come out in playtesting. [[User:Surgo|Surgo]] 16:19, July 4, 2010 (UTC) | I think right now that's making it too hard for the attacker as they already have to draw line of effect through them in the first place and hit the spell with the attack of opportunity, but it might be an appropriate idea. That's something whose answer will come out in playtesting. [[User:Surgo|Surgo]] 16:19, July 4, 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Decent? That's +20+10 vs. +20+18 we're talking about as a baseline case. | ||
Revision as of 20:18, 4 July 2010
Playtesting Note
Ghostwheel had the following idea in chat:
<Ghostwheel> Could be *noddish* Perhaps make it a CL check, both sides getting a bonus equal to 2x the spell level spent? <Ghostwheel> That way duskblades can be decent too, even with lower-level spells
I think right now that's making it too hard for the attacker as they already have to draw line of effect through them in the first place and hit the spell with the attack of opportunity, but it might be an appropriate idea. That's something whose answer will come out in playtesting. Surgo 16:19, July 4, 2010 (UTC)
Decent? That's +20+10 vs. +20+18 we're talking about as a baseline case.
