Sorry about not being specific enought I was refering to base casting chances. I personally feel they are too low and wasn't sure what pervious eds had said.
Matt
Bruce Probst <bprobst@netspace.net.au> wrote:
On Sat, 15 Feb 2003 00:48:35 -0000, "Lust_82 <lust_82@yahoo.com>"
<lust_82@yahoo.com> wrote:
>My gaming group was having a discussion over Magic rules. I
>remebered the statement that was made here That second ed rules was
>better than third but alas none of us have had the privelege of
>seeing a second ed book. So Can someone share some insight.
You'll need to be more specific. The basic "rules" about using magic was
unchanged in 3rd edition, so far as I can recall, but many spells were
altered, some colleges of magic added and some removed.
IMO the spell alterations were overall for the worse (many spells were
arbitrarily reduced to NEGATIVE base chances, for instance!) although a
small number were improved; the added colleges were good (but were not "new"
to anyone who had seen a copy of "Arcane Wisdom" or the issues of Ares that
featured them) and the deleted colleges were sorely missed.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Probst bprobst@netspace.net.au ICQ 6563830
Canberra, Australia MSTie #72759 SCA #80160
"Oh dear Lord, the canary exploded."
ASL FAQ http://www.users.bigpond.net.au/mantis/ASLFAQ
To Post a message, send it to: dq-rules@eGroups.com
To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: dq-rules-unsubscribe@eGroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.