Proposal 1 - dragon#364 made legal

Halford · Dec 16, 2008

Swordmages are controversial becuase they are considered by some to be more powerful than their fellow defenders. Personally I no longer agree, although this opinion is based upon a rulerset which includes both the Adventurer's Vault - and possibly Martial Power though I have yet to properly peruse this.

The Adventurer's Vault in particular makes playing characters wearing heavy armor a great deal more viable with the introduction of MW Armors - which give a greater boost to heavy armors.

IMO Swordmages are fairly well balanced, but are a bit snazzier than their other defender counterparts.

garyh · Dec 16, 2008

My "genasi easy, swordmages controversial" comment was just a random example. I don't have any idea whether either will controversial, but I'd guess not.

covaithe · Dec 16, 2008

Right. There seems to be a consensus to treat the separate articles as separate proposals. Having finally taken the time to read them all with at least reasonable care, I'll open the voting:

YES to the warforged article.
YES to the wizard illusion powers article.

NO to the Ashen Covenant article, mostly because it's only a few items, and I feel like we ought to consider Adventurer's Vault before we start going crazy with the additional item sources. I'd be willing to reconsider a proposal for a specific item that someone really wants, but unless we actually expect to use items from this source, I feel like the default answer should be no.

NO to the Wolves of Maldeen article. There are three things in this article: a heroic tier feat, a warlord paragon path, and a bunch of items. I don't have any problem with the feat; if someone wants to take this feat, propose it separately and I'll vote yes. The paragon path I'm not sure about. It seems mostly okay, but some of the abilities seem far enough away from the standard mold of PP abilities that I'd have to think more about them. Since we've barely reached level 2 in L4W, let alone level 11, I think it's wise to hold off. The items, see above, and also the Wolfen Weapon seems like cheese to me.

NO to the Vor Kragal article. The only thing in there is one weapon, I'd want discussion of before allowing anyways, since it increases reach. I'd be willing to reconsider if someone really wanted the weapon and could provide arguments why it's okay.

elecgraystone · Dec 16, 2008

Issue #364 get's the big rubber stamp from me. I didn't find anything objectionable in it. I'll make a few points where I disagree with covaithe's no's.

Ashen Covenant article. With the existence of a ritual to make magic items, one can be made anytime you have enough money. This means all new items should be voted on at the start instead of piecemeal, since we should expect people to look at all available sources when making up there mind what to spend there money on.

Wolves of Maldeen article. The wolven weapon only stops surprise and only once per day. Note that this doesn't stop an ambush, it just makes it so you can act in the surprise round. Doesn't seem too cheesy.

Vor Kragal article. The extra reach for the weapon only works with basic attacks. As such, I don't see any kind of problem with it.

Basically, I'd like to vote on items now instead of waiting and debating each individual item when someone wants to make it. An item is either ok or not. At worst there might be some kind of interaction with an item in the future, but if that's the case it can be brought up again.

garyh · Dec 16, 2008

I'm going to have to agree with covaithe.

YES to the warforged article.
YES to the wizard illusion powers article.
NO to the Ashen Covenant article.
NO to the Wolves of Maldeen article.
NO to the Vor Kragal article.

In general, I would prefer to avoid including a "source" that really only has one or two rules elements (such as a feat, or an item, or a power), as having lots of those will clutter things up to no good purpose. Articles that have lots of new rules elements (like the wizard illusion article) or provide a complete overview of a topic (like the warforged write-up) are much more important to me.

Halford · Dec 16, 2008

After careful consideration my votes are...

YES: To the Warforged article. Although I personally believe intelligent items should not be effectively limited to Warforgeds and will likely propose that docents be available to all, albeit with a little reflavoring - the Warforged are certainly powerful enough as it is without this being theirs alone.

YES: To the Wizard Illusion Powers article. Nothing here that worried me and some nice flavor and variety.

YES: To the Ashen Covenant articles items mainly because there are only a few of them and to my view they are all rather incocuous. It seems easy to approve them now rather than come back and I cannot see any of them being even faintly unbalancing even compared to PHB items.

I will seperate out my votes on the Wolves of Maldeen article.

NO: Wolfen Weapon, too easy to abuse, I can see every group of paragon tier and above carrying the 9th level version and it never being actually used as a weapon.

YES: Greaves of Maldeen, and Hood of the Wolf.

YES: Against all Odds feat.

YES: Packmaster Paragon Path.

YES: The Vor Kragal article, or more specifically the Weapon of Myrdroom's Shard. Spears are not the best weapon choice as it is and this gives them a nice boost, the fact that it is lightening damage is also somewhat mitigating. If it encourages more weapon variety then thats a plus for me to.

OOC: Sheesh when did I get so permissive?

Halford · Dec 16, 2008

I think it would be relatively easy to include links and a brief explaination of smaller source feats somewhere. Thus we have a list of available items, feats, etc., which players could quickly peruse looking at basic descriptions.

Feats:

Against all Odds: Gives combat bonuses when adjacent to three or more foes. http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/dra...vesMaldeen.pdf

Hmmm, a feat to help those faceing three or more adjacent foes, that might be useful for my defender, etc.

garyh · Dec 16, 2008

Well, I'm open to being convinced on changing my No votes. And as the Character Builder will include all those rules from "one rules element" articles, maybe I'm over-emphasizing the confusion of having them available.

elecgraystone · Dec 16, 2008

The DDI compendium already has dragon 364 added. See here for the weapon from the Vor Kragal article. You have to have a subscription to see the actual stats though.
D&DI Compendium : Insider : Dungeons & Dragons