Author Topic: Discussion and Suggestion Thread  (Read 199842 times)

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4503
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #780 on: March 16, 2013, 04:24:13 AM »
Why not tie it to the ability damage?

So they keep the penalties as long as the ability damage is left, but they are removed as soon as they are removed?

Is there any good way to track ability damage like that? For example:

I take penalties from effect 1 that causes 3 Strength damage. Then, later on, I take 5 Strength damage from another source. Then I get hit with a Lesser Restoration spell that heals 4 Strength damage. Do I still suffer the penalties?

I take penalties from effect 1 that causes 3 Strength damage. Then, later on, I take penalties from effect 2 that causes 3 Strength damage. Then I get hit with a Lesser Restoration spell that heals 4 Strength damage. Do I still suffer the penalties? From which effect? Both? Neither?

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #781 on: March 16, 2013, 04:47:28 AM »
I've got it. Let's introduce -1/-1 counters

Offline DonQuixote

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 2946
  • What is sickness to the body of a knight errant?
    • View Profile
    • The Spellshaping Codices (Homebrew Board)
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #782 on: March 16, 2013, 05:51:19 AM »
Why not tie it to the ability damage?

So they keep the penalties as long as the ability damage is left, but they are removed as soon as they are removed?

Is there any good way to track ability damage like that? For example:

I take penalties from effect 1 that causes 3 Strength damage. Then, later on, I take 5 Strength damage from another source. Then I get hit with a Lesser Restoration spell that heals 4 Strength damage. Do I still suffer the penalties?

I take penalties from effect 1 that causes 3 Strength damage. Then, later on, I take penalties from effect 2 that causes 3 Strength damage. Then I get hit with a Lesser Restoration spell that heals 4 Strength damage. Do I still suffer the penalties? From which effect? Both? Neither?

...oh, right.  Yeah.  That...is unclear.  And making just "as long as that ability score is damaged" is probably wide open to abuse.

So, 5 rounds and 8 rounds, then?



I've got it. Let's introduce -1/-1 counters

Don't make me open one of my six mouths and sing the song that ends the Earth.
“Hast thou not felt in forest gloom, as gloaming falls on dark-some dells, when comes a whisper, hum and hiss; savage growling sounds a-near, dazzling flashes around thee flicker, whirring waxes and fills thine ears: has thou not felt then grisly horrors that grip thee and hold thee?”

Offline Amechra

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4560
  • Thread Necromancy a specialty
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #783 on: March 16, 2013, 12:11:44 PM »
Well, you could just make it "until they next would heal ability damage to that ability score", which gets rid of most of those issues...

(Also, you could totally have a PrC that expands on Infect to do that, if you don't want it in the basic ability...)
"There is happiness for those who accept their fate, there is glory for those that defy it."

"Now that everyone's so happy, this is probably a good time to tell you I ate your parents."

Offline DonQuixote

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 2946
  • What is sickness to the body of a knight errant?
    • View Profile
    • The Spellshaping Codices (Homebrew Board)
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #784 on: March 16, 2013, 10:45:23 PM »
Yeah, but I just realized another problem: If you're immune to ability damage, but not diseases, everything goes to hell in a handbasket.
“Hast thou not felt in forest gloom, as gloaming falls on dark-some dells, when comes a whisper, hum and hiss; savage growling sounds a-near, dazzling flashes around thee flicker, whirring waxes and fills thine ears: has thou not felt then grisly horrors that grip thee and hold thee?”

Offline Amechra

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4560
  • Thread Necromancy a specialty
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #785 on: March 16, 2013, 10:48:27 PM »
I... don't know of any situation where that's the case?

Even if something like that comes up, just state that if you are immune to ability damage, you are immune to the penalties as well.
"There is happiness for those who accept their fate, there is glory for those that defy it."

"Now that everyone's so happy, this is probably a good time to tell you I ate your parents."

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4503
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #786 on: March 16, 2013, 11:58:34 PM »
For Pox, I would recommend not letting the infection spread repeatedly to creatures that already have it.

I... don't know of any situation where that's the case?

Even if something like that comes up, just state that if you are immune to ability damage, you are immune to the penalties as well.

Creatures with nonabilities are immune to damage to those ability scores. Additionally, the Body Ward spell negates a certain amount of ability damage, as does the Strongheart Vest soulmeld, which potentially prevent you from taking any ability damage from the disease-like effect without providing immunity. So what it would actually be is that if you don't take any ability damage, you don't take any penalties either.

Instead of worrying about tying durations to ability damage, why not just tie it to a regular old disease? As in, do it like the Contagion spell (save or take the ability damage immediately and be infected, dealing ability damage every day thereafter when you fail the save), with the added effect that you take your -2 penalty to attack rolls/AC/saves/whatever until you are cured of the disease? You already have 6 diseases to work with. The names are already done, incubation is irrelevant, ability damage is a flat 2 Str/Dex/Con/etc., and save DC can be a simple 14 to 16 (10+level vs. the minimum save DC that the formula can have under normal ability score minimums). It's more disease-like to use actual disease mechanics, no?

Offline DonQuixote

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 2946
  • What is sickness to the body of a knight errant?
    • View Profile
    • The Spellshaping Codices (Homebrew Board)
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #787 on: March 17, 2013, 09:24:05 AM »
For Pox, I would recommend not letting the infection spread repeatedly to creatures that already have it.

Oh, yeah.  That's intended to be the case, so let me come up with some wording for it.

Instead of worrying about tying durations to ability damage, why not just tie it to a regular old disease? As in, do it like the Contagion spell (save or take the ability damage immediately and be infected, dealing ability damage every day thereafter when you fail the save), with the added effect that you take your -2 penalty to attack rolls/AC/saves/whatever until you are cured of the disease? You already have 6 diseases to work with. The names are already done, incubation is irrelevant, ability damage is a flat 2 Str/Dex/Con/etc., and save DC can be a simple 14 to 16 (10+level vs. the minimum save DC that the formula can have under normal ability score minimums). It's more disease-like to use actual disease mechanics, no?

Ehh.  Part of what I wanted to get away from was the easily-recoverable swift action that let you inflict conditions lasting days.  I really am leaning towards 5 rounds and 8 rounds at this point--most combats that I've seen are over by that point, unless you're fighting something that deserves multiple infections.
“Hast thou not felt in forest gloom, as gloaming falls on dark-some dells, when comes a whisper, hum and hiss; savage growling sounds a-near, dazzling flashes around thee flicker, whirring waxes and fills thine ears: has thou not felt then grisly horrors that grip thee and hold thee?”

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4503
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #788 on: March 17, 2013, 11:02:36 AM »
For Pox, I would recommend not letting the infection spread repeatedly to creatures that already have it.

Oh, yeah.  That's intended to be the case, so let me come up with some wording for it.

Instead of worrying about tying durations to ability damage, why not just tie it to a regular old disease? As in, do it like the Contagion spell (save or take the ability damage immediately and be infected, dealing ability damage every day thereafter when you fail the save), with the added effect that you take your -2 penalty to attack rolls/AC/saves/whatever until you are cured of the disease? You already have 6 diseases to work with. The names are already done, incubation is irrelevant, ability damage is a flat 2 Str/Dex/Con/etc., and save DC can be a simple 14 to 16 (10+level vs. the minimum save DC that the formula can have under normal ability score minimums). It's more disease-like to use actual disease mechanics, no?

Ehh.  Part of what I wanted to get away from was the easily-recoverable swift action that let you inflict conditions lasting days.  I really am leaning towards 5 rounds and 8 rounds at this point--most combats that I've seen are over by that point, unless you're fighting something that deserves multiple infections.

If you wanted to avoid a long-term condition, why were we even discussing tying the penalties to the ability damage?

Offline DonQuixote

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 2946
  • What is sickness to the body of a knight errant?
    • View Profile
    • The Spellshaping Codices (Homebrew Board)
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #789 on: March 17, 2013, 11:04:42 AM »
For Pox, I would recommend not letting the infection spread repeatedly to creatures that already have it.

Oh, yeah.  That's intended to be the case, so let me come up with some wording for it.

Instead of worrying about tying durations to ability damage, why not just tie it to a regular old disease? As in, do it like the Contagion spell (save or take the ability damage immediately and be infected, dealing ability damage every day thereafter when you fail the save), with the added effect that you take your -2 penalty to attack rolls/AC/saves/whatever until you are cured of the disease? You already have 6 diseases to work with. The names are already done, incubation is irrelevant, ability damage is a flat 2 Str/Dex/Con/etc., and save DC can be a simple 14 to 16 (10+level vs. the minimum save DC that the formula can have under normal ability score minimums). It's more disease-like to use actual disease mechanics, no?

Ehh.  Part of what I wanted to get away from was the easily-recoverable swift action that let you inflict conditions lasting days.  I really am leaning towards 5 rounds and 8 rounds at this point--most combats that I've seen are over by that point, unless you're fighting something that deserves multiple infections.

If you wanted to avoid a long-term condition, why were we even discussing tying the penalties to the ability damage?

Well, if I had to guess...probably because I've been awake for far too long at this point, and am currently very easily distracted by shiny objects.

Edit: Is "Whenever an uninfected creature comes within 5 feet of the subject of a Pox, you may force that creature to attempt its own Fortitude save against infection" clear enough for Pox?
« Last Edit: March 17, 2013, 11:07:06 AM by DonQuixote »
“Hast thou not felt in forest gloom, as gloaming falls on dark-some dells, when comes a whisper, hum and hiss; savage growling sounds a-near, dazzling flashes around thee flicker, whirring waxes and fills thine ears: has thou not felt then grisly horrors that grip thee and hold thee?”

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #790 on: March 27, 2013, 01:41:51 PM »
Is the apparent omission of a Combat Shaping feat that eliminates the need to make or grants a bonus on checks made to shape defensively a deliberate choice?

EDIT: I've posted a new base class based on mounted combat. Fucker's 19 pages long, counting the basic mount options, so I don't expect reviews any time soon. Seriously, me, what the hell. It's got options for 5 different mount types, each of which gives you a progression of 4 class features, as well as a section on mount advancement and... just, what the hell.

Anyway, I doubt I've balanced it properly yet, but I wanted it for a campaign in the far future, so it's here now. It's a much revised version of the shitty Magitek Knight I posted elsewhere on the boards, which I'll now proceed to pretend never existed.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2013, 10:36:58 PM by Bauglir »

Offline Epsilon Rose

  • Lurker
  • *
  • Posts: 21
  • The King of Unrest
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #791 on: April 08, 2013, 11:03:21 PM »
Is the apparent omission of a Combat Shaping feat that eliminates the need to make or grants a bonus on checks made to shape defensively a deliberate choice?

EDIT: I've posted a new base class based on mounted combat. Fucker's 19 pages long, counting the basic mount options, so I don't expect reviews any time soon. Seriously, me, what the hell. It's got options for 5 different mount types, each of which gives you a progression of 4 class features, as well as a section on mount advancement and... just, what the hell.

Anyway, I doubt I've balanced it properly yet, but I wanted it for a campaign in the far future, so it's here now. It's a much revised version of the shitty Magitek Knight I posted elsewhere on the boards, which I'll now proceed to pretend never existed.

Hey, I might be playing a Advaitan in a game that's coming up. I've been trying to figure out how I might play it and I think I've noticed some things. That said, I've never played a mount based character before, so I could be wildly mistake, and corrections or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

It seems to me that, for a class based on being a rider, the Advaitan has very little to do with mounted combat. The only things they seem to get are slightly improved maneuverability and the one soul as two abilities. Normally I would think "one soul as two" would be enough, considering how powerful an extra major formula per round is, but it's reliance on spell strike blade and the fact that it costs the same as a quicken seems to cause something of a problem. Spell strike blade's (and the construct mount's spelltriger's) lack of an immunity clause limits the selection of formula you can safely use and the fact that you're using weapon damage instead of a spellshaper attack means you probably doing less damage by mid-to-late levels at closer ranges. One soul as two's second tier abilities costing as much as a quicken also means your not getting much over simply taking the quicken metashaping feat and casting two major formulas in a round (this is especially true of the construct mount's version which basically just casts the formula normally).

Again, I've never made a mounted character before, nor am I the most familiar with melee characters in general, so if I'm missing anything please tell me.

Thank you for your time and sorry for the trouble.

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #792 on: April 09, 2013, 12:50:28 AM »
That may be true, so I'm going to write out a bunch of background that I hope explains what I was trying to do. In writing the class, I was aiming for a niche that involves a lot of things - spellshaping, melee combat, and mounted combat. What I tried to do was hybridize all of those. In order to use your spellshaping to its greatest effect, you need to be in melee, and you need to be mounted. Your spellshaping makes use of your mount directly, and your class features are primarily geared toward streamlining mounted play (eliminating fiddly, little rolls) and ensuring a durable mount. In my experience, the biggest problem with most mounted combat classes is that you either have a mount that's irrelevant in combat, or you have one that's as good as another character in the party. By making it a fixture for your own abilities and making it difficult to destroy, I'd hoped to create a mount that would remain meaningful without feeling like having a new party member as a class feature.

The class began as an attempt at a "partial spellshaper". I tried a lot of different angles (you can see the original draft as the Magitek Knight), but I just couldn't get it to work in a balanced way. The second tier One Soul as Two abilities were always intended to be the core of the class, but after a lot of back-and-forths with DonQuixote, it became clear that spellshaping as a system just isn't designed for a stunted progression. So, I decided that I had to move them to a later point and restrict the power of the formula you shape through them in some other way, which I decided would be by using a metashaping degree. You've correctly determined that Quicken was relevant here. I priced it that way because it's a very similar effect - getting a major formula without using your standard action. I have only just now, however, realized that the action requirements to trigger it are so steep as to merit a discount. I hadn't quite realized that you need to attack and use a swift action to get it to work, so you don't actually have the option of dumping out multiple formulae in a round. Likely, as a first try, I'll decrease the cost to degree 2 and swap it and the first tier abilities. I'll need to think about it.

Anyway, all that said, I think the class actually has more mounted combat abilities than most mounted combat classes in 3.5. I don't know about Pathfinder, but everyone else pretty much gets a mount, and that's it. This class gets a mount at level 1 (pretty much unheard of, since a horse is already better than a level 1 character, which mandated all the new creatures), bonus feats that work in conjunction with mounted combat, a way to use your mount's actions to special effect, and three class features specifically dedicated to making your mount work better for you (Improved Mounted Combat, Cavalry Master, and Surefooted Charge). Aside from One Soul as Two, though, they're all pretty generic, I admit.

However, I do totally need to add an immunity clause to Spelltrigger, and add the bonus damage I'd meant to put in there (the ability was always a bit bland). You'd be adding your Intelligence modifier to damage with an attack shaped in that way, which is a nice edge but probably not enough to put it over the top compared to the control or combo options the other mounts allow. I also need to specify that Spellcurse deals its damage after the action is taken, so that it doesn't do anything like interrupt spellcasting, which would make it far and away the most powerful.

It'll be a bit before I can actually make these changes to the class, and when I do, I'll probably add the mount-free ACF that borrows heavily from the Anchorite. But until then, you can consider the following to be errata:

You and your mount are immune to the negative effects of a formula shaped with the Spelltrigger ability.
Whenever your mount shapes a formula on your behalf through your Spelltrigger or Spellbeam abilities, add your Intelligence modifier to the damage dealt by that formula, if any.
Each 2nd tier One Soul as Two ability requires that the level of the formula you shape, plus the degree of any metashaping feats you apply to that formula, plus 2, be equal to or less than 1/2 your shaper level (rounded up).

Thank you for the post! It's pretty helpful.
« Last Edit: April 09, 2013, 12:53:56 AM by Bauglir »

Offline DonQuixote

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 2946
  • What is sickness to the body of a knight errant?
    • View Profile
    • The Spellshaping Codices (Homebrew Board)
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #793 on: April 09, 2013, 12:04:29 PM »
I still exist, just drowning in work at the moment.  I should actually be working now, but I can't focus on what I'm supposed to be doing!

Well, if I had to guess...probably because I've been awake for far too long at this point, and am currently very easily distracted by shiny objects.

Edit: Is "Whenever an uninfected creature comes within 5 feet of the subject of a Pox, you may force that creature to attempt its own Fortitude save against infection" clear enough for Pox?

Nobody ever responded here, so I went ahead and changed Infect and Pox to 5 rounds and 8 rounds.  I also made the "uninfected" change to Pox.  Any other issues with the Devouring Shadow revision?

Is the apparent omission of a Combat Shaping feat that eliminates the need to make or grants a bonus on checks made to shape defensively a deliberate choice?

Deliberate choice.  Melee spellshapers generally have class features to let them ignore attacks of opportunity, and non-melee spellshapers are non-melee.

EDIT: I've posted a new base class based on mounted combat. Fucker's 19 pages long, counting the basic mount options, so I don't expect reviews any time soon. Seriously, me, what the hell. It's got options for 5 different mount types, each of which gives you a progression of 4 class features, as well as a section on mount advancement and... just, what the hell.

Anyway, I doubt I've balanced it properly yet, but I wanted it for a campaign in the far future, so it's here now. It's a much revised version of the shitty Magitek Knight I posted elsewhere on the boards, which I'll now proceed to pretend never existed.

'Kay.  I'll gratuitously ignore it for the time being and let you deal with it.  Any problems it creates are on your head.
“Hast thou not felt in forest gloom, as gloaming falls on dark-some dells, when comes a whisper, hum and hiss; savage growling sounds a-near, dazzling flashes around thee flicker, whirring waxes and fills thine ears: has thou not felt then grisly horrors that grip thee and hold thee?”

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #794 on: April 11, 2013, 04:00:13 PM »
Aforementioned errata has been incorporated. Immunity clause added to Spelltrigger. I'm not going to add one to Spellbeam because if you can somehow find a way to affect yourself with an area effect that doesn't include your space, you deserve whatever's coming to you. I decided against the bonus damage, having though back to some earlier Spellshaping classes and how that ability proved problematic. It might have been iteratives multiplying that damage, but I figure I might as well shy away from it unless it really seems like they're falling behind. Constructs are supposed to be the straightforward ones, anyway. Also, advaitans need to qualify for their bonus feats now.

Now working on the Spelleater.

EDIT: And it's up.
« Last Edit: April 11, 2013, 04:58:29 PM by Bauglir »

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4503
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #795 on: April 11, 2013, 06:23:34 PM »
Bauglir, can I borrow/steal/shamelessly rip off some of the mount stuff for my mecha?

Your domesticated spider is missing the definition of its poison.

You have some bad italics tags in the Vermin entry of One Soul as Two. Also, the abilities in Plant, Undead, and Vermin are the wrong order (the 9th-level ability is listed first instead of the 5th-level ability).

Offline Nanshork

  • Homebrew Reviewer
  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 13393
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #796 on: April 11, 2013, 06:24:47 PM »
I still exist, just drowning in work at the moment.  I should actually be working now, but I can't focus on what I'm supposed to be doing!

Anything we can do to help?

Offline Bauglir

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 629
  • Constrained
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #797 on: April 11, 2013, 08:37:54 PM »
Bauglir, can I borrow/steal/shamelessly rip off some of the mount stuff for my mecha?

Your domesticated spider is missing the definition of its poison.

You have some bad italics tags in the Vermin entry of One Soul as Two. Also, the abilities in Plant, Undead, and Vermin are the wrong order (the 9th-level ability is listed first instead of the 5th-level ability).

Please do steal as much as you like. If an idea's good enough to rip off, that means I've done a good job. Fixed the italic tags, incorrect numbering of the One Soul as Two abilities, and added the poison definition (Con-based, DC 12, 1d3/1d3 Str). Pretty terrible poison, but I don't want it to be anything but an inconvenience since you get access at level 1.

Offline DonQuixote

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 2946
  • What is sickness to the body of a knight errant?
    • View Profile
    • The Spellshaping Codices (Homebrew Board)
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #798 on: April 12, 2013, 06:15:25 AM »
I still exist, just drowning in work at the moment.  I should actually be working now, but I can't focus on what I'm supposed to be doing!

Anything we can do to help?

Primarily just be patient with the fact that I'm almost certainly not going to have time to revise anything further until June.  At the earliest.
“Hast thou not felt in forest gloom, as gloaming falls on dark-some dells, when comes a whisper, hum and hiss; savage growling sounds a-near, dazzling flashes around thee flicker, whirring waxes and fills thine ears: has thou not felt then grisly horrors that grip thee and hold thee?”

Offline Amechra

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4560
  • Thread Necromancy a specialty
    • View Profile
Re: Discussion and Suggestion Thread
« Reply #799 on: April 12, 2013, 08:48:25 AM »
Bauglir, can I borrow/steal/shamelessly rip off some of the mount stuff for my mecha?

Your domesticated spider is missing the definition of its poison.

You have some bad italics tags in the Vermin entry of One Soul as Two. Also, the abilities in Plant, Undead, and Vermin are the wrong order (the 9th-level ability is listed first instead of the 5th-level ability).

Please do steal as much as you like. If an idea's good enough to rip off, that means I've done a good job. Fixed the italic tags, incorrect numbering of the One Soul as Two abilities, and added the poison definition (Con-based, DC 12, 1d3/1d3 Str). Pretty terrible poison, but I don't want it to be anything but an inconvenience since you get access at level 1.

Can I steal the statted out monsters? They seem like great things to advance a little and give to weirder cultures (I mean, ooze-riding is utterly rad.)
"There is happiness for those who accept their fate, there is glory for those that defy it."

"Now that everyone's so happy, this is probably a good time to tell you I ate your parents."