Proposal 1 - dragon#364 made legal

Ozymandias79 · Nov 15, 2008

With my first post and thread also, yeah , lucky me

: no problem! I was warned that it would much meta-talking

Yes, Garyh, it is my thread but all your words weighs heavy especially covaithe's, since he helped me so I will only nominate the playing warforged and the class act: wizard article

And I see the point of not having Shelly Mazzanoble's Confessions of a Full-Time Wizard among the legal material since it adds nothing rulewise

garyh · Nov 16, 2008

covaithe said:
BTW, where were the oversized nerfs? I didn't spot any in a quick scan through the table of contents of 364.

Halford said:
They are apparently in 369 and are currently only for the Minotaur, though it apparently seems clear that they will be across the board according to various threads I have been perusing - some of which featured the like of Mike Mearls virtually confirming this.

You're correct, the Oversized nerf was not 364, it was 369. It was just brought up because it's in the same kind of race article as the warforged. Essentially, in the full PC write up, the minotaur loses Oversized and gains a special charge attack and an AC boost versus OA's while charging (which didn't impress me). And Halford is right, Mearls himself has stated here on EN World that Oversized will be taken from races that have it, and no new races will get it.

Which is a bummer.

Halford · Nov 16, 2008

After having had a chance to read the Minoatur article, thanks to certain good samaritans

, I remain distinctly underwhelmed. In exchange for the power I cared about that was always on they upgraded the power I did not care about, never used, and am never likely to use - because it is an encounter power which does less damage than my basic attack. No wait it makes them prone, except that I'm probably flanking anyway - because I have a brain - so I get no benefit from that other than causing my foe to use a minor action.

Lose, lose for Brudd, but then he can probably afford it with his luck.

Despite my reservations I am in favor of implementing it.

garyh · Nov 16, 2008

Halford said:
After having had a chance to read the Minoatur article, thanks to certain good samaritans , I remain distinctly underwhelmed. In exchange for the power I cared about that was always on they upgraded the power I did not care about, never used, and am never likely to use - because it is an encounter power which does less damage than my basic attack. No wait it makes them prone, except that I'm probably flanking anyway - because I have a brain - so I get no benefit from that other than causing my foe to use a minor action.

Lose, lose for Brudd, but then he can probably afford it with his luck. Despite my reservations I am in favor of implementing it.

Yeah, that was my impression of the oversized-for-charge swap. Total powerdown. I can understand oversized being considered too powerful (even if I disagree), but give them something good but balanced in exchange, not something blah and super-situational.

Makes me worried what they'll do to bugbears. The Str/Dex still makes for a great brutal rogue (and the flavor still works perfect for Hrav), but the only other thing they have besides oversized is Predatory Eye, which is pretty weak (an extra 1d6 per fight on an attack with CA? Basically an extra 1.75 damage per fight, assuming a 50% miss rate), and I don't know what else they'd get.

But I digress.

ukingsken · Nov 16, 2008

I guess I have something to say about a few points.

As far as some players having a tacit advantage over others I dont think that would be the case. We can all hope that in theory something we allow into the game would not only have been playtested quite thoroughly by WOTC but also would be something we've all looked at and thought to not be unbalancing. Essentially it just gives people such as myself who have an insider subscription and every 4e book thus far the opportunity to use them. I think it would feel almost like I was being penalized if additional sources were not allowed just because not everyone might have them. If we have valid content issues or problems with the flavour of certain things not matching our world then sure, bar it but I dont think it would be fair to dissallow material since some people may not have it. Some people dont even have MM for example.

Regarding Covaithe's statement about the item by item I agree completely. It would waste a huge amount of time and bandwidth for something that on a whole is unnecessary. It would seem more prudent to simply look through the book before approval and discuss what not to allow from it rather then what to allow. There should be way less no's then yes's I would think?

The grandfathering does suck, and inevitably it does feel like a downgrade for those of you it would affect, but I would imagine the fully fleshed out versions were more rigorously playtested etc and thus changed for good reasons. But it still sucks *sympathetic shoulder pat*

The disclaimer also seems like a good idea as more MM races (drow for example) have been or will be fleshed out in other publications and will almost certainly change somewhat.

Other then that, nice to meet everybody lol. Bit of a long winded post but I intend to stay involved around here as this is the first pbp community I've come across that seems to have there act together.

Halford · Nov 16, 2008

Other then that, nice to meet everybody lol. Bit of a long winded post but I intend to stay involved around here as this is the first pbp community I've come across that seems to have there act together.

Aw shucks, well we do try -or at least the organized types do and I post a lot to make up for my foibles

.

As for availability it has been a kind of default understanding with LEW at least that less sources means less broken, and that allowing the completes, etc., as opposed to just the SRD would disadvantage certain players. I was sort of harking back to that ideal, but upon reflection I don't think its valid.

Afterall lets face it if you have a computer you can get access to material with relative ease - unscrupulous types find pdfs on torrents like limewire, etc., or can peruse the books at borders or the like. So yes I am infavor of inclusion rather than exclusion. The only thing that worries me is character checking when there are ten expansion books out, I can only imagine LEWs burden if they had allowed all 3.5 books - gulp! So you are a Necropolitan, Half-Minotaur, Gestalt, Swordsage, Facotum, hey? :.-(

Though of course I still have high hopes that 4th edition will remain more balanced, so that was perhaps not the best example.

stonegod · Nov 16, 2008

Halford said:
I can only imagine LEWs burden if they had allowed all 3.5 books - gulp! So you are a Necropolitan, Half-Minotaur, Gestalt, Swordsage, Facotum, hey? Though of course I still have high hopes that 4th edition will remain more balanced, so that was perhaps not the best example.

This was the purpose of the delay for LEB: To allow things to be playtested before being added so judges could measure things for themselves.

In general, I'd recommend at least one judge/character judge to have access to the DDI/Compendium just for checking reasons.

warderbrad · Nov 16, 2008

I know I am new here and you all are free to disregard my comments as I have not been here long to have much right to them. I would suggest that if a change goes into effect for a race/class that is a downgrade that it apply to all characters new and old. However should that person with a character impacted by this new rule feel that they can no longer play their character as they were imagined, that they be given the opportunity to create a new character with the same number of XP and number and levels of magic items. This would allow players who would not choose to continue with the new version of the race/class a option to go another route without being forced to start over.

Atanatotatos · Nov 16, 2008

That sounds reasonable Warderbrad, though i'd say the judges need to have some control over that. For example, a Player who no longer wanted to be a ranger because cascade of blades no longer allows him to one-shot Orcus after the nerf shouldn't be allowed to do that...
Also, some kind of penalty should be in order if the character is currently adenturing. After all, it does detract a bit from experience when a pc disappears from a party.

Atanatotatos · Nov 16, 2008

Anyway, by December we should be able to nominate articles from Dragon #365 and #366 too (I think the time for free material to be proposed was three months, right). As it's been said, it's too early, but since the point has been made, here are the article I find of interest.

Dragon 365:
Ecology of the Dragonborn

Dragon 366:
Mithrendain, citadel of the Feywild
Wish upon a star
Ritually speaking

Also, just in case there are articles from before the 15th of September, Dragon 367:
Epic Faerun
Children of Darkness
Playing Gnolls