+ Log in or register to post
Results 41 to 50 of 211
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 03:01 PM #41
Waghalter (Lvl 7)
I would reverse the thinking on the Cleric verses the Priest.
The base 'heal bot' cleric does not need a spell selection. This is the 1e Cleric that wields a mace and it a pocket fighter (interestingly more of a gish then most wizard attempts at the gish).
The cleric would have a few abilities to modify their mace usage and various healing magics as they level (maybe borrow the lay on hands ability from the the Pathfinder Paladin or something similar that allows healing or some charges to be used for more complex types of healing <cure blindness, cure disease> ).
This would be the simplified Cleric.
The priest would be more of the 'bells and whistles' version of a holy person who has domains representing different gods and pantheons. They would have the spell selection which would include various domain lists of spells.
The bridge between the two classes would be taking the Cleirc and then giving some options that can be pulled from the base and replaced with other options. This would create the Storm Cleric or Fire Cleric (reducing the mace usage for something else and giving a bit different in the utility power selection).
- EN World
- has no influence
- on advertisings
- that are displayed by
- Google Adsense
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 03:47 PM #42
They of course mention the Psion as being an example of a point using magic class, but is there anything about the way the Psion's power system (more likely the 3.5e one, over the 4e one) was implemented that should be changed?
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 03:54 PM #43
The Grand Druid (Lvl 20)
I think using Feats to get some magical abilities is a little too limiting. Feats are a limited resource to begin with. Spending a Feat per spell-like ability is a bit expensive.
I'd like to see something more like: at character creation, you choose a number of spell-like abilities equal to your Intelligence/Wisdom bonus. You may then aquire more spell like abilities through the expenditure of a Feat.
Make a Feat able to grant two or three spell like abilities.
Just reintroduce Cantrips and make them completely at-will.
Mark "El Mahdi" Armstrong
Retired NCO, Grognard Extraordinaire and Plenipotentiary
Semper Operor Verus
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 03:59 PM #44
Myrmidon (Lvl 10)
My problem with Vancian casting is the focus on per-day abilities. I think anything more than minimal per-day balancing is simply bad, and is almost guaranteed to produce an imbalanced game. I think 4E has a bit too much, as it is. I'm loathe to see a return to those old mistakes.
Hopefully, all that per-day junk will be limited to Wizards. And I can just ban them from any table I DM (and try to find a like-minded DM, if I'm playing). But my guess is the other spellcasting systems will be just as per-day based, since I recall one of the devs repeating that old "expected encounters per day" nonsense. In which case, so much for 5E.
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 04:11 PM #45
Guide (Lvl 11)
The big problem with the system is the situation, in which you can cast two more fireballs, but not a single fly spell. It's extremely rare to have such a thing appear anywhere in myth or fiction.
But I am really interested how this poll turns out. It's a subject on which anyone has a strong oppinon, but nobody really knows how common each view is.
http://spriggans-den.com My site for the Ancient Lands setting and everything RPG related.
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 04:54 PM #46
The Great Druid (Lvl 17)
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 04:58 PM #47
Myrmidon (Lvl 10)
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 05:16 PM #48
Guide (Lvl 11)
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 05:16 PM #49
Myrmidon (Lvl 10)
Monday, 27th February, 2012, 05:32 PM #50
Greater Elemental (Lvl 23)
The one thing I'd love to see with regards to these "at-will" magical cantrips you gain with feats is for it to be stated quite clearly either in the cantrip explanation (or perhaps in the DMG) what the numbers could be for the DM to attribute consistent and balanced damage dice to their use.
For example... Mage Hand as a spell/cantrip traditionally has done no damage. However, there have always been ways that magic-users have "explained" the method for using Mage Hand so that it could be used to cause damage. Whether this was telekinetic punches, knocking things off shelves to drop on people's heads, directing vials of alchemists fire, etc.
It'd be great if there was a standard damage rating for all abilities gained via these feats. Like any basic magic feat could cause 1d4+INT damage depending how its used for example. So that whatever ability you got from whatever feat you took... if you found a way to use it offensively, the damage caused were balanced against each other and the 'spells' a Vancian wizard might have.
Use a Tenser's Floating Disk as an offensive attack? Does 1d4+INT damage. Use Mage Hand as an offensive attack? 1d4+INT damage. Use Ghost Sound offensively (like creating loud screams in the ears of the monster?) 1d4+INT damage. Give the casters the benefit of thinking of cool, weird ways to use their magic in addition to the standard method of what these cantrips would do. The benefit is... you don't ask the player to have to take TWO of these feats... one an offensive at-will attack, the other, a cool "non-combat" effect feat.