Author Topic: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions  (Read 58323 times)

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #120 on: June 17, 2013, 11:37:05 AM »
Quote
At 20th the Druid chooses one Aspect from the Stage 3 list
Old text from a previous version?

Yes. The table was correct.

Verold Druid Aspects go from little of note (stage 1-4) to something quite serious (stage 5, elementals) both suddenly and right at the end of the class.

I've already explained that said progression was intended.

Do you think the numbers involved great too large a disparity? If so, which numbers on which abilities?

Are some of the abilities themselves a larger jump than others? Which?

I cannot possibly refine this further in regard to your critiques unless you are vastly more specific.

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #121 on: June 20, 2013, 07:22:17 PM »
Fixed quote issues.

Also lowered most numbers for stage 5 AoN. Don't think I changed them when I had added AoEs. Abilities themselves remain the same.

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4503
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #122 on: June 20, 2013, 07:59:14 PM »
Verold Druid Aspects go from little of note (stage 1-4) to something quite serious (stage 5, elementals) both suddenly and right at the end of the class.

I've already explained that said progression was intended.

Do you think the numbers involved great too large a disparity? If so, which numbers on which abilities?

Are some of the abilities themselves a larger jump than others? Which?

I cannot possibly refine this further in regard to your critiques unless you are vastly more specific.

I can accept that it is intended, I just don't think that the paradigm shift is a good thing to have that late in a class progression. Levels 1-10 are when you should be acquiring and developing core competencies. Anything after that (11-20) should be refining your existing capabilities.

I may not be able to provide any more useful insight into your classes as our design philosophies may be too far apart. Additionally, having taken a quick look some of the other Verold classes, I see that the power level of most classes is sufficiently different from the norm that I cannot properly evaluate them in their context.

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #123 on: June 20, 2013, 08:14:17 PM »
Additionally, having taken a quick look some of the other Verold classes, I see that the power level of most classes is sufficiently different from the norm that I cannot properly evaluate them in their context.

It is a rather extensive project, which is a big part of why I need help ironing out details and pinning down numbers.

Overall the classes should be more powerful (significantly in some cases), with the exception of the Cleric and Druid. Sorceror and Wizard sadly have so few class features that there wasn't anything to nerf.

Secondary goals have been to provide every class with interesting (not just numeric) reasons for pursuing depth into the classes as well as options in combat (over simply full attack).

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #124 on: August 23, 2013, 09:54:06 PM »
The first thing that strikes me is that the text for Aspect of Nature is different from the table; the table has stage one at 3-6 (not 4-7), stage two at 6-9 (not 7-10), stage three at 9-12 (not 10-13), stage 4 at 13, 15, and 17 (not 13-15), and stage five at 18 and 20 (not 15-17).

Gods, I'm a terrible editor  :-\ I think the text ones were from before the aspects of elements.

Stage Two Nature: Do you need to specify +5 feet for the legs of the deer one, or is just +5 customary?

Added '. Generally, there's nothing else it could be, but specification is not a bad thing.

Stage Three Nature: How long does it take to spin a spider's web?

The entire action is an attack action. It works like web spinning monstrous spiders. I will specify more information and clarify the link.

Is it necessary to state which natural weapons are primary (and get full strength) and which are secondary, or is that inherent in their type?

"When a creature has more than one natural weapon, one of them (or sometimes a pair or set of them) is the primary weapon. All the creature’s remaining natural weapons are secondary.

The primary weapon is given in the creature’s Attack entry, and the primary weapon or weapons is given first in the creature’s Full Attack entry. A creature’s primary natural weapon is its most effective natural attack, usually by virtue of the creature’s physiology, training, or innate talent with the weapon."

Emphasis mine. The best natural attack you have is your primary if there's nothing specifying otherwise.

Stage Four Nature: What is the effect of the wolverine's rage if the rage ability the Druid already has comes from a template, spell, item, or other source that does not specify an effective class level for the rage?

He gains the rage of a 1st level Barbarian, since he does not have anything rage related that a +1 class level would determine.

Stage Five Nature: When curled up like a hedgehog, must the Druid take the Full Defense action each turn, unless they choose to uncurl? Or is this a "free"(-action) +10 AC and 5d6 retaliation for not being able to move?

"and is considered to be taking the total defense action" ;) Capitalizing for emphasis though.

Stage One Elements: Wrapped in Fire, and its electric and negative-energy counterparts, seem powerful (at least in comparison to the rest). They deal 6d6 damage (no save), plus 3d6 (at least) and action denial from fire, and the electric or negative-energy counterparts don't have a phrase preventing the Druid from walking back and forth, crossing the 10' line to deal 6d6 damage multiple times. Additionally, does the Acid-breath one count as a breath weapon?

None of them possess such a phrase preventing multiple hits. Adding one in. Fire doesn't deny actions though, unless you want to end it early.

And I would say that being able to use your breath as a weapon counts as a breath weapon, yes.

Stage Two Elements: Do the movement-speed granting Drifts overwrite your speed (such as the Nature-aspect fly speed, or a racial Swim speed), or use the faster speed? (Again, this is a question I feel that more experienced people would know, but it's unclear to me.)

They use the speed listed. Twice your land speed for swim, same as land speed for flight. I'm not sure I understand the question, though? They are different movement modes. The same as any creature that has a flight, swim, or climb speed.

Also, the healing-from-damage by absorbing elements one seems to they have very high heal-to-damage ratios; even making half of your save means that you'll gain the full spell's value in HP. (Taking half, and healing 1.5, means that you heal the full damage of the spell, despite only making your save for "half" damage.) From memory, I feel like I've seen that kind of healing at three damage = one healing, but I'm not sure.

I had remembered the same ratio, just had it backward. But you're right, saving even against a partial affect would give you a net gain of hit points. Reversed the ratio.

Druidic Avenger: I understand how it seems to work, though by giving Druid rage equal to a Barbarian of its level (even without Mighty/ Greater Rage), I feel that it makes the Barbarian superfluous; there aren't that many other substantial features the Barbarian gets, other than Rage.

This gets into a little murkier territory, as its meant to work wit the Barbarian variant from the same setting. It has a much expanded rage ability (including new types and larger buffs at the higher steps), as well as other abilities that compliment it.

The Avenger variant here is pretty much just how the unearthed arcana avenger variant interacts with the barbarian changes.

Coyote Druid Racial Substitutions: Fits, although I feel that the substitution levels don't make any sense for an Avenger, which bugs me because Avengers get special bonuses for being a Coyote and giving up the racial Dog companion.

That's kind of the point though. The Avenger wouldn't be able to get the cap on the generic Druid sub levels, since they don't qualify for the cap if they give up their animal companion.

Also, the level-9 row on the table is missing the Stage 3 Aspect.

Fixed.

Elemental Affinity: This scares me, because of the damage problems it could cause, thanks to the auto-damaging Elemental Drifts. However, it's only available at level 18 (you gain Aspect of Elements at level 16), so that reassures me... a little.

Those specifically would get a bit powerful, yes. But, especially at that level, there are generally better things for spellcasters to be doing than using feats to focus on direct damage.  ;)

Affinity Master: Again, damage. Scary. However, there's no way to gain this feat without extra bonus feats, or going Epic. This is thanks to the fact that Elemental Affinity can only be taken at level 18, and you don't get another feat normally until level 21, which is Epic. And honestly, there are better things for Epic feats.

;)

Share Aspects: oh god the damage[/i]. If you, say, sell your soul (Pact Certain) at level 18 (shortly after getting Elemental Affinity) to get Affinity Master and picked up Share Aspects earlier, you've got (6d6 (fire) + 12d6 (electricity) + 12d6 (negative))*2= 60d6 of damage every time you and your Animal Companion get close to something. No save. Oh, and if you have the movement to back up and then back into the 10' range? Another 48d6. Per 10' of extra movement you have. This... scares me.

Just throwing on the not causing damage twice clause to those abilities fixes this. But, you're right, if you dumped everything into nothing else, you could do some serious AoE damage passively. Think I'll drop it down to 4d6 for the auras.

Offline Gazzien

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 2113
  • Science? Science.
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #125 on: August 23, 2013, 11:29:20 PM »
Yeah, I'm sorry about the movement-speed thing. I wasn't thinking quite straight with that.

I had seen Fire, and read the 'extending duration' thing as you don't get the initial burn again.

Okay, we're good now. Looks good to me!

Offline FireInTheSky

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3870
  • "Insight is the sudden cessation of stupidity."
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #126 on: August 28, 2013, 01:01:17 AM »
I'd like to provide some critique here, but I'm a little overwhelmed by the size of this, and not really sure where to start. Do you need more on the Druid, or is there something else you'd like me to look at the most?

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #127 on: August 29, 2013, 09:54:29 PM »
I'd like to provide some critique here, but I'm a little overwhelmed by the size of this, and not really sure where to start. Do you need more on the Druid, or is there something else you'd like me to look at the most?

Need more wherever your eyes draw you. ;)

Though, I threw Druid in the exchange thread because I wanted opinions on both the nature/element balances, plus potentially ideas for the missing elementals.

Barbarian is in a similar state with the calms.

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4503
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #128 on: August 30, 2013, 02:41:51 AM »
Let me take a quick look at the Barbarian, since you're asking.

(click to show/hide)

Also, why did you remove the AC bonus from Monks? I'm assuming that Unarmed Strike, Tongue of the Sun and Moon, and other abilities that appear on the table but not in the text work normally, but the AC bonus doesn't appear at all. Also, Fast Movement should say a +10-foot, not +10 bonus.

Offline FireInTheSky

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3870
  • "Insight is the sudden cessation of stupidity."
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #129 on: August 30, 2013, 04:10:56 AM »
Here's a critique for the Barbarian (feel free to reject any and all of my wording suggestions):

Pseudoedit: Ninja'd by Garryl! (Yes, even though I posted an hour and a half after him. I was watching something on TV...)

(click to show/hide)

Despite the seemingly large number of wording suggestions, overall, I like it!

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #130 on: August 30, 2013, 09:22:34 PM »
Also, why did you remove the AC bonus from Monks? I'm assuming that Unarmed Strike, Tongue of the Sun and Moon, and other abilities that appear on the table but not in the text work normally, but the AC bonus doesn't appear at all. Also, Fast Movement should say a +10-foot, not +10 bonus.

I didn't. It's, again, just my poor editing.  :shakefist

I even reference the AC bonus still in the weapon and armor profs. Adding a note like Spellcasting for Druids, since I don't want to make another table line lol.

Fixed both.

Battle Ecstasy provides no benefit with respect to DR if your highest DR is one your enemy can bypass (ex: DR/magic, which usually comes in larger quantities because its easier to bypass). In such respects, you'd be better off without that type of DR at all than with it. The +2 bonus should instead be to all DR you have (remember, multiple types of DR don't stack, so there's no double dipping here) and give DR 2/- in all cases, even if you already have DR. Ditto for Resilient Rage.

Yea, having it add to all.

Mountain Rage should increase your size by 1 category, rather than explicitly setting your size to Large. Also, is the -2 penalty to attack and AC supposed to be in addition to the normal size penalties for being larger? It's unclear if it's that or it's supposed to replace the normal -1 penalty for Large size.

Clarified.

Raging Strength's calm effect needs a time limit (probably within 1 round or something). As-is, nothing is stopping you from raging outside an encounter and immediately ending it to add a massive bonus to your first attack.

Good point.

Swift Rage's calm effect produces a ridiculous amount of attacks. Unless you're attacking with tickles, I have trouble seeing 5+Con mod extra attacks not instagibbing anything you focus on. Also, if you calm out of a Swift Rage, the wording seems to indicate that you get the attacks immediately, rather than having to make them as part of a full attack like Haste and similar effects. I don't think that's intended.

Good point, I don't think I was taking the initial 5 rounds into account.

Is Battle Ecstasy's explosive calm effect supposed to make them miss everyone? The fluff seems to imply that they should only miss attacks against you, not attacks made from and towards locations well outside your reach.

It is intended to affect all attacks by that foe. Same issue with ratio as above though, so dropped it to 1/3 instead of full.

Mountain Rage's explosive calm effect is a no save, just lose effect. Your enemies will be unable to act for about three times as long as it usually takes to win against enemies who do fight back.

Again, ratio issue. Cut in half. And added a Fort save against stun and Will save against daze to justify penalty of double loss.

Fixed a few others too. Do the ratios all look good now?

BAB is off at level 16.

Skills: A Barbarian adds Knowledge (Nature) and Spot Barbarian list of skills.

I feex.

Should Raging Strength have a minimum of 1? Also, is the bonus just to the attack roll, or to damage as well?

Rounding down is the standard assumption, no? Have to sac at least 2 rounds. But i'll clarify that it is to hit and damage.

put Swift Rage with all of the other rage types, especially since you give a Calm for Swift Rage before you actually say what it is.

Hrmm, good point. It was organized that way before I added the Calms. Switched, and reworded a bit to make the higher level option clearer.

For Mountain Rage is there a save?

There is now. ;)

In the second round of you raging all up in peoples' grills

Best way to phrase that evar.

4 full rounds' worth of actions before the end of your current turn... Also, if you take the Fueled by Rage feat a couple times, you could do it again in the same round.

Again, obviously the ratio is off. Another example of needing eyes on the numbers. ;)

But I also had not considered how that feat would interact. Nerfed the ratio to 1/6 and going to clarify the feat, noting that you can't use the same Calm twice in one round. So this limits you, even if you wanted to burn a TURN of rages, to one Sudden Calm and one Explosive Calm per round. Though each could still be giving 3 different benefits pre-epic.

What about SLAs?[/spoiler]

They are (usually) affected by things that affect spells, are they not? Added clarification, if for nothing else than to separate SUs as not counting.

Despite the seemingly large number of wording suggestions, overall, I like it!

All good... I am a horrible editor of my own ideas, as I think I've said before. ;)



And thank you both. :D

Would either of you happen to have insights on the various sub/alts as well?

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4503
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #131 on: August 31, 2013, 12:13:58 AM »
It just occurred to me that the duration of your rage isn't actually defined until you end your turn. What happens, then, if you calm out of a rage for a duration-dependent effect on the turn you start the rage, before the duration is set?

Offline FireInTheSky

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3870
  • "Insight is the sudden cessation of stupidity."
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #132 on: August 31, 2013, 12:17:56 AM »
Quote
Battle Ecstasy: A 3rd level Barbarian can choose to channel his rage into a battle ecstasy, giving him a +4 bonus to Dex and Con. Additionally, all forms of DR he currently possesses increase by 2, and he gains DR 2/- and a +2 bonus to all forms of DR he possesses.
Also, it appears that there's now a broken tag ([/li]?) after the description of this.

In the second round of you raging all up in peoples' grills

Best way to phrase that evar.
I thought you'd like it.  :D

Quote
4 full rounds' worth of actions before the end of your current turn... Also, if you take the Fueled by Rage feat a couple times, you could do it again in the same round.

Again, obviously the ratio is off. Another example of needing eyes on the numbers. ;)

But I also had not considered how that feat would interact. Nerfed the ratio to 1/6 and going to clarify the feat, noting that you can't use the same Calm twice in one round. So this limits you, even if you wanted to burn a TURN of rages, to one Sudden Calm and one Explosive Calm per round. Though each could still be giving 3 different benefits pre-epic.
Even at 1/6, without too much work you could get 3 rounds, and with more work, you could still get 4. You might want to just set a limit of 1 or 2 rounds.

Quote
Would either of you happen to have insights on the various sub/alts as well?
Maaaaybe...

Quote
Wolf:  You gain insight into the loyal pack of the wolves. Starting at 1st level whenever you flank an opponent, you and all allies who also flank the same opponent gain an additional +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls against that opponent. Every level that your damage reduction would have gone up, you instead gain a “flanking point.” Each flanking point is good for an additional +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls, and as a free action can be divided as you see fit amongst any allies flanking the same target as you, including yourself.
So, it is not the case that everyone gets the accumulated boni, but instead the total is broken up however you choose between all flanking allies? If that's the case, then the wording needs some work. Unfortunately, I'm not sure of the best way to say it, because, as a free action, you could theoretically shift it all to the person attacking, then spend another free action to shift it all back to yourself, attack, and then shift it over to a 3rd flanker, etc. In any case, I don't think it's broken if all flankers get the bonus all the time anyway, so I'd probably just take out the flanking point stuff. Just say something like this:
Quote
Wolf:  You gain insight into the loyal pack of the wolves. Starting at 1st level whenever you flank an opponent, you and all allies who also flank the same opponent gain an additional +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls against that opponent. Every level that your damage reduction would have gone up, instead this bonus increases by 1. you instead gain a “flanking point.” Each flanking point is good for an additional +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls, and as a free action can be divided as you see fit amongst any allies flanking the same target as you, including yourself.
Much simpler, much cleaner, and not broken (as far as I can tell).

Nothing jumps out at me for the other Animal Spirits and Racial Subs. Also, is it just me, or should you be taking every opportunity possible to replace "Bear Barbarian" with "Barbearian"? :hide Just me? Okay.

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #133 on: August 31, 2013, 07:32:18 PM »
It just occurred to me that the duration of your rage isn't actually defined until you end your turn. What happens, then, if you calm out of a rage for a duration-dependent effect on the turn you start the rage, before the duration is set?

A very good point. I had not considered that issue.

IT would, I suppose, be quiet a nerf to single round rage/calm novaing to have it be retroactively decided based on being back to your normal Con score at the end of the round, which I may want to keep.

But it would also be a bit too complex, especially if there were any other buffs or debuffs dropped in there.

But the point of it was to lock them in to a set duration after gaining their rage boost, instead of it changing in response to other buffs/debuffs.

Sadly, I'm not sure of a better way to phrase it. Perhaps something like:

"...plus a number of extra rounds equal to the Barbarian's Con mod immediately after activating the rage (adding more Con boosts or suffering a penalty after that does not change the rage's duration)..."

Also, it appears that there's now a broken tag ([/li]?) after the description of this.

Ugh... Feext.

Even at 1/6, without too much work you could get 3 rounds, and with more work, you could still get 4. You might want to just set a limit of 1 or 2 rounds.

Hrmmm... Thinking about it... With a feat involved, you could, essentially, imitate time stop, each encounter, with a consistent duration.

What do you think about something closer to one extra round, if you give up 10 full rounds, 2 rounds, and if you give up 20, 3 rounds? Essentially all the way down to 1/10, but with a cap still.

So, it is not the case that everyone gets the accumulated boni, but instead the total is broken up however you choose between all flanking allies?

Yea. All flankers gain +3 instead of +2, and you gain up to 5 flanking points to distribute as well.

If that's the case, then the wording needs some work. Unfortunately, I'm not sure of the best way to say it, because, as a free action, you could theoretically shift it all to the person attacking, then spend another free action to shift it all back to yourself, attack, and then shift it over to a 3rd flanker, etc.

A 1/rnd limit would solve that problem.

In any case, I don't think it's broken if all flankers get the bonus all the time anyway, so I'd probably just take out the flanking point stuff.

 Just say something like this:
Quote
Wolf:  You gain insight into the loyal pack of the wolves. Starting at 1st level whenever you flank an opponent, you and all allies who also flank the same opponent gain an additional +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls against that opponent. Every level that your damage reduction would have gone up, instead this bonus increases by 1. you instead gain a “flanking point.” Each flanking point is good for an additional +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls, and as a free action can be divided as you see fit amongst any allies flanking the same target as you, including yourself.
Much simpler, much cleaner, and not broken (as far as I can tell).

The bonus then would be +8 for all flankers. Hrmmm... But high number of flankers isn't that common, especially at 20 where they'd be cranked that high...

Also, is it just me, or should you be taking every opportunity possible to replace "Bear Barbarian" with "Barbearian"? :hide Just me? Okay.

No, not at all... And I totally do any other time I'm talking about them. :D
« Last Edit: August 31, 2013, 07:49:03 PM by EjoThims »

Offline FireInTheSky

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3870
  • "Insight is the sudden cessation of stupidity."
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #134 on: August 31, 2013, 08:14:34 PM »
Even at 1/6, without too much work you could get 3 rounds, and with more work, you could still get 4. You might want to just set a limit of 1 or 2 rounds.

Hrmmm... Thinking about it... With a feat involved, you could, essentially, imitate time stop, each encounter, with a consistent duration.

What do you think about something closer to one extra round, if you give up 10 full rounds, 2 rounds, and if you give up 20, 3 rounds? Essentially all the way down to 1/10, but with a cap still.
If you do this, you have to make sure you have a minimum. You can't just say "up to 10 full rounds," because then you could wait until you had 1 round left, and then sacrifice it to get a free full round action. ...Actually, I'm not sure you need to do that. It may not be a problem, because no encounter is ever going to last that long, so you're pretty much never going to use all the rounds anyway.

So you're basically proposing 1 round + 1 round per 10 sacrificed? I'd probably just do 1/10 straight-up. I feel like extra full round actions are so useful, and so rare, that it justifies a cost that high. I mean, even at 1/10, you're still basically getting a one- or two-round time stop every encounter.

Quote
So, it is not the case that everyone gets the accumulated boni, but instead the total is broken up however you choose between all flanking allies?

Yea. All flankers gain +3 instead of +2, and you gain up to 5 flanking points to distribute as well.

If that's the case, then the wording needs some work. Unfortunately, I'm not sure of the best way to say it, because, as a free action, you could theoretically shift it all to the person attacking, then spend another free action to shift it all back to yourself, attack, and then shift it over to a 3rd flanker, etc.

A 1/rnd limit would solve that problem.

In any case, I don't think it's broken if all flankers get the bonus all the time anyway, so I'd probably just take out the flanking point stuff.

 Just say something like this:
Quote
Wolf:  You gain insight into the loyal pack of the wolves. Starting at 1st level whenever you flank an opponent, you and all allies who also flank the same opponent gain an additional +1 bonus on all attack and damage rolls against that opponent. Every level that your damage reduction would have gone up, instead this bonus increases by 1. you instead gain a “flanking point.” Each flanking point is good for an additional +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls, and as a free action can be divided as you see fit amongst any allies flanking the same target as you, including yourself.
Much simpler, much cleaner, and not broken (as far as I can tell).

The bonus then would be +8 for all flankers. Hrmmm... But high number of flankers isn't that common, especially at 20 where they'd be cranked that high...
I'd just do the +8 for all flankers. It's not OP, and it's way simpler. You might potentially have more flankers at a higher level, from facing larger creatures (the Tarrasque?), but I don't think those creatures are gonna care about the extra +8 too much.

Quote
Also, is it just me, or should you be taking every opportunity possible to replace "Bear Barbarian" with "Barbearian"? :hide Just me? Okay.
No, not at all... And I totally do any other time I'm talking about them. :D
Good. I'm glad it isn't just me. :P

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #135 on: August 31, 2013, 08:37:23 PM »
I'd just do the +8 for all flankers. It's not OP, and it's way simpler. You might potentially have more flankers at a higher level, from facing larger creatures (the Tarrasque?), but I don't think those creatures are gonna care about the extra +8 too much.

I think it will mostly be of benefit at low-mid levels. Being swamped by a bunch of mooks with SA and such. But that's also where the Wolf racial feat it's meant to emulate is designed to shine, so it works out. ;)

Quote
Also, is it just me, or should you be taking every opportunity possible to replace "Bear Barbarian" with "Barbearian"? :hide Just me? Okay.
No, not at all... And I totally do any other time I'm talking about them. :D
Good. I'm glad it isn't just me. :P
[/quote]

Boz even used it as the tagline in the Homebrew Compendium  :lmao

Offline FireInTheSky

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3870
  • "Insight is the sudden cessation of stupidity."
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #136 on: August 31, 2013, 09:10:32 PM »
Boz even used it as the tagline in the Homebrew Compendium  :lmao
I forgot about that.  :lol

Offline Garryl

  • DnD Handbook Writer
  • ****
  • Posts: 4503
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #137 on: August 31, 2013, 10:16:16 PM »
Another thought for consideration. Perhaps give two forms of rage at level 1 (an offensive and a defensive version, like Raging Strength + Battle Ecstasy) so, even at the beginning, you get the feel and options of having different types of rages. You can move up the remaining rages by 2 levels apiece, thus having a lesser, baseline Swift Rage come before Greater Rage, which also lets you show an improvement to Swift Rage with Greater Rage (instead of it being left out). This, in turn, makes it look better (you don't have one rage type mysteriously left out of Greater Rage), and you can, potentially, introduce ACFs later on that trade away Greater Rage without messing up the balance between the different rage types.

It just occurred to me that the duration of your rage isn't actually defined until you end your turn. What happens, then, if you calm out of a rage for a duration-dependent effect on the turn you start the rage, before the duration is set?

A very good point. I had not considered that issue.

IT would, I suppose, be quiet a nerf to single round rage/calm novaing to have it be retroactively decided based on being back to your normal Con score at the end of the round, which I may want to keep.

But it would also be a bit too complex, especially if there were any other buffs or debuffs dropped in there.

But the point of it was to lock them in to a set duration after gaining their rage boost, instead of it changing in response to other buffs/debuffs.

Sadly, I'm not sure of a better way to phrase it. Perhaps something like:

"...plus a number of extra rounds equal to the Barbarian's Con mod immediately after activating the rage (adding more Con boosts or suffering a penalty after that does not change the rage's duration)..."

"A fit of rage lasts for a number of rounds equal to 3 + the character’s (newly improved) Constitution modifier", straight from the SRD Barbarian. Change the 3 to a 5 (and maybe the "newly improved" to "possibly improved" as not all rages boost Constitution) and you're done.

Offline EjoThims

  • Honorary Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 531
  • The Ferret
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #138 on: August 31, 2013, 11:57:01 PM »
Another thought for consideration. Perhaps give two forms of rage at level 1 (an offensive and a defensive version, like Raging Strength + Battle Ecstasy) so, even at the beginning, you get the feel and options of having different types of rages. You can move up the remaining rages by 2 levels apiece, thus having a lesser, baseline Swift Rage come before Greater Rage, which also lets you show an improvement to Swift Rage with Greater Rage (instead of it being left out). This, in turn, makes it look better (you don't have one rage type mysteriously left out of Greater Rage), and you can, potentially, introduce ACFs later on that trade away Greater Rage without messing up the balance between the different rage types.

Very good idea.

"A fit of rage lasts for a number of rounds equal to 3 + the character’s (newly improved) Constitution modifier", straight from the SRD Barbarian. Change the 3 to a 5 (and maybe the "newly improved" to "possibly improved" as not all rages boost Constitution) and you're done.

The reason I had shifted away from the SRD wording was to specify the duration not changing from later Con changes. For some reason, I had never thought to just drop the parenthetical into the standard wording...  :banghead

Offline FireInTheSky

  • Epic Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3870
  • "Insight is the sudden cessation of stupidity."
    • View Profile
Re: Verold Reviews/Questions/Discussions
« Reply #139 on: November 13, 2013, 01:36:08 PM »
Are SLAs usable while in Animal Form? (I'm thinking about making a Fox Naturalist.)