For reference, here are the articles with rules elements in Dragon 373:
- Art of the Kill - Assassin themed feats, powers, paragon path, and equipment (of interest to Tonks, I'm sure).
- Codex of Betrayal - Monsters.
- The Brood of Alloces - Monsters.
- Ecology of the Sharn - Monsters (and a level 28 orb).
- Ampersand - Adventurer's Vault preview items. We don't allow preview/playtest material, though.
In terms of player material, the only thing I really see of note is Art of the Kill. Monsters don't require the same sort of approval as player rules elements, anyway.
EDIT: That list is really striking. Glad they've since declared they're going to be more player-focused in Dragon and more DM focused in Dungeon. Monsters belong in Dungeon. Dragon is for player goodies.
__________________ Gary Hoggatt - www.garyh.net "Such heroic nonsense..."
Bah. I like having more in-depth things about monsters and stuff in Dragon. Not every issue needs to have tons more player options. The old Ecology Of... articles were awesome, they need more of those! In Dungeon all you get are some stat blocks at the end of adventures.
Bah. I like having more in-depth things about monsters and stuff in Dragon. Not every issue needs to have tons more player options. The old Ecology Of... articles were awesome, they need more of those! In Dungeon all you get are some stat blocks at the end of adventures.
I like Ecology articles and new monsters, too. But those are clearly DM resources. When they crowd out new player options, I feel like I'm missing out. It's not like Dungeon had player stuff creeping in and taking page count from the adventures.
Not that this discussion has anything to do with this proposal, mind you...
__________________ Gary Hoggatt - www.garyh.net "Such heroic nonsense..."
Man, I remember the good old days when Dragon had stuff that wasn't even about D&D. Like book reviews, and articles for other games. I'd never even heard of Top Secret, but the article about cool James Bond gadgets was still interesting! And I don't recall anybody ever complaining about taking "page count" away from anything...
NO on the Orb of Entropy, just to avoid having to list a whole new article in the charter just for one measly item that nobody's ever going to qualify for. If anyone ever gets anywhere close to level 28, we can revisit it.
For the assassin article:
The backgrounds are all PHB2 style, so no particular problem there. Backgrounds at this point are basically "give your character one extra class skill, +2 to any one skill, or a new language, and make up a good reason why". I think we should just allow any background of that format as a matter of course, and keep our regional benefits with more unique and interesting effects instead. (That's a separate proposal, though.) For now I'll just vote YES to the backgrounds (including those that allow Secret Language's - people can just make up a likely sounding secret language, and it may or may not come up in adventures, kind of like the hooks section.)
Feats (won't vote on these until there's some discussion):
Fey Escape pretty much obsoletes Escape Artist for eladrin. There's lots of precedent for that, though.
Fey Death: if a fey pact warlock reduces a cursed enemy to 0, do they now get to teleport twice (3 squares, then 5 squares, or vice versa, for a total of 8 squares touching down once in the middle)? Or do they have to choose one of the two teleport effects to trigger?
Prime Punisher is obviously good for melee rangers, but also great for warlocks combined with Reaper's Touch or the new Eldritch Strike (neither of which have passed yet). I don't think it's overpowered, though, just noting it.
Unexpected Escape: are there any other feats or powers that let you shift after escaping a grab? I'm pretty sure I've seen one, but I may be imagining it. If so, would this shift stack?
Untraceable: Oops. I've already been giving invisible creatures +5 to Stealth. Just looked it up though, and I can't find a rule about that anywhere, so I don't know where I got that from.
Guild feats: these are a neat concept. Do we want to say that you must belong to a specific guild (ie. two characters from different guilds with Furtive Signals don't get the extra bonus) or just let any two characters with a Guild feat get a synergy bonus? I think probably the latter - it's a bit less realistic, but in a normal campaign the DM would normally be arranging things so that all the PC's are in the same guild anyway if these come into play, and letting it be more open would increase their utility in a world where people jump from party to party. (It also avoids the problem of controlling access to guilds: if the MMC start taking guild feats to represent how tight-knit they are, you don't want a random player to be able to declare themselves a member by taking the appropriate guild feat, but you also don't want DM's and judge's to need to make judgement calls about who's allowed to take this and who's not. If any guild is interchangeable, the members of the MMC can claim the random character is actually part of a different guild if they don't want them to join, without affecting the mechanics.)
Wow, that's a lot of feats. Ok, I haven't read the multiclass or technique feats yet - I'll come back to them later.
Nightmare Weaver paragon path: Insidious Curse is problematic when combined with the Rod of Reaving. It lets you kill a minion and immediately curse another minion, which kills that too. The chain is only broken when the nearest creature to you is not a minion. If you're a feylock you can teleport after each kill which lets you put yourself closer to the next minion, too. It's just like the Rod of Reaving/Rod of Corruption combo, but even more powerful.
FYI, there's a paragon feat in AP called Relentless Curse, which does the same thing as Insidious Curse, only with a much smaller investment.
I don't know how I feel about the Rod of Reaving combos. On the one hand, I don't think one item plus one feat should turn a striker into an incredible minion killer. On the other hand, the Rod of Reaving is sort of garbage against anything that's not a minion.
I don't know how I feel about the Rod of Reaving combos. On the one hand, I don't think one item plus one feat should turn a striker into an incredible minion killer. On the other hand, the Rod of Reaving is sort of garbage against anything that's not a minion.
Well look at it this way. Not every group has a controller. If a warlock wants to take one of his paragon feats and magic item so he can fill in at least the minion-killing part of a controllers job, that sounds fair to me. Lets face it, if your party lacks area attacks, a bunch of minions can kick your ass.
The 'Rod of Reaving combos' only step on the controllers toes if you have one.
Ok, just looked at the multiclass feats. Don't see anything wrong there. Also the technique feats:
I'm not sure I like the way Harlequin Style negates the penalty for Brash Strike and Brash Assault. (In fact, if you have a 16 or higher Cha, you now get a net bonus to your defense when using Brash Strike!)
Well look at it this way. Not every group has a controller. If a warlock wants to take one of his paragon feats and magic item so he can fill in at least the minion-killing part of a controllers job, that sounds fair to me. Lets face it, if your party lacks area attacks, a bunch of minions can kick your ass.
The 'Rod of Reaving combos' only step on the controllers toes if you have one.
Yeah, this was pretty much the same conclusion I (eventually) came too, along with the following additions:
1. Everyone says the warlock is a quasi-controller anyway.
2. There is more to being a controller than sweeping away mooks, and the Rod of Reaving doesn't help with any of those other functions.
For Harlequin Style, it's only a boost to a single At-Will (some exceptions apply), and the user is still granting combat advantage, which is still trouble if the target has some sneak attack equivalent. I don't mind it for Brash Strike because charisma is suboptimal for fighters. As for Brash Assault, if the penalties for making the free attack are too high, intelligent foes might not take it.
Actually, I'm rather tempted to make a Tiefling Fighter now.
I posted a thread in the rules forum to ask about Fey Death (it's here) and somebody pointed out that in the Dragon article, Fey Death lets you use your Fey Step as a free action, and in the Compendium, it's listed as an immediate reaction. (The difference is that you only get one immediate reaction and it can't be used on your turn, which limits Fey Death a lot since your turn is when you usually kill people. In this case I favour using the Dragon version.)
Ok, discussion seems to have tailed off, so time to vote:
I'm still not sure I like that one effect of Harlequin Style, but it's not big enough to be worth banning.
NO on the Orb of Entropy. YES on the Assassin article, with the following clarifications/amendments:
1. Fey Death is the Dragon version, not the Compendium version. (This should be noted in the charter so people don't get confused.)
2. Bonuses for having more than one party member with a Guild feat apply even if they're members of different Guilds.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
