Difference between revisions of "User talk:Luigifan18/Agebreaker (3.5e Spell)"
From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Luigifan18 (talk | contribs) (→Humans Are Short-Lived) |
Foxwarrior (talk | contribs) (→Humans Are Short-Lived) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Even taking away the range doesn't really justify making a no-save ''disintegrate'' two levels lower. --[[User:Foxwarrior|Foxwarrior]] ([[User talk:Foxwarrior|talk]]) 20:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | Even taking away the range doesn't really justify making a no-save ''disintegrate'' two levels lower. --[[User:Foxwarrior|Foxwarrior]] ([[User talk:Foxwarrior|talk]]) 20:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
:It's still a touch attack. And it doesn't actually disintegrate anything. --[[User:Luigifan18|Luigifan18]] ([[User talk:Luigifan18|talk]]) 21:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | :It's still a touch attack. And it doesn't actually disintegrate anything. --[[User:Luigifan18|Luigifan18]] ([[User talk:Luigifan18|talk]]) 21:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::It matches ''disintegrate'' in terms of damage/level at age 35. Which is much lower than the ages of most young adults. --[[User:Foxwarrior|Foxwarrior]] ([[User talk:Foxwarrior|talk]]) 22:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 22:02, 5 December 2012
Humans Are Short-Lived
Even taking away the range doesn't really justify making a no-save disintegrate two levels lower. --Foxwarrior (talk) 20:14, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
- It's still a touch attack. And it doesn't actually disintegrate anything. --Luigifan18 (talk) 21:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
- It matches disintegrate in terms of damage/level at age 35. Which is much lower than the ages of most young adults. --Foxwarrior (talk) 22:02, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
