Difference between revisions of "Talk:Additional Epic Spell Factors (3.5e Variant Rule)"
From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
m (moved Talk:Additional Epic Spell Factors (3.5e Other) to Talk:Additional Epic Spell Factors (3.5e Variant Rule): Variant Rule, not Other) |
Foxwarrior (talk | contribs) (→Focus: new section) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
:Sure, go for it. -- 20:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC) | :Sure, go for it. -- 20:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == Focus == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Consider that a Focus is a generally one-time GP investment for being able to cast a spell, and researching an epic spell is definitely a one-time GP and XP investment for being able to cast a spell. Consider also that a clever caster could design every spell to use the same focus. Therefore, you probably shouldn't save money by shunting the cost into the focus, so it should take more than 9000 GP for a -1 spellcraft reduction. --[[User:Foxwarrior|Foxwarrior]] ([[User talk:Foxwarrior|talk]]) 18:41, 20 October 2012 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:41, 20 October 2012
This seems to be a supplemental rule, so I suggest moving it over there. --Havvy 15:27, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
- Sure, go for it. -- 20:44, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
Focus
Consider that a Focus is a generally one-time GP investment for being able to cast a spell, and researching an epic spell is definitely a one-time GP and XP investment for being able to cast a spell. Consider also that a clever caster could design every spell to use the same focus. Therefore, you probably shouldn't save money by shunting the cost into the focus, so it should take more than 9000 GP for a -1 spellcraft reduction. --Foxwarrior (talk) 18:41, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
