Fixing Sacred Circle

[Stalker0]

Current thoughts: after sleeping on it, I'm not sure whether I'll bump it to an encounter power. Burst 3 for the length of the encounter, every encounter, could effectively give the PCs a +1 to AC, since a 7x7 square is a large enough space to allow for a lot of tactics.

I think this will depend on how mobile your games are. In my games, sometimes the power has been awesome, and sometimes its barely come up. After playing with it a long while, none of my group thinks its overpowered as an encounter power, so that's for you to decide.

You could also consider keeping it as a daily but adding something else to it...for example (to go with the defender motiff), if a monster with the paladin's challenge attacks someone other than the paladin, the mark damage increased by 5 or something (just throwing an idea off the top of my head).

 

[Nifft]

I agree that powers with a duration of "encounter" shouldn't be made into Encounter powers.

Now, how can it be made more Defender-ish? (Choose one.)

• You can mark two enemies within the effect's radius when using your Divine Challenge.
• Your Divine Challenge inflicts extra damage on foes within the radius of the effect (say 3, then +implement, because Implement).
• Foes you have marked suffer an additional -2 penalty on attacks which do not include you, if the attack's target is within the effect.
• Foes cannot shift across the boundary of the effect.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Stalker0]

[*] Foes you have marked suffer an additional -2 penalty on attacks which do not include you, if the attack's target is within the effect.

I'm a fan of this one. Cleric one is better...except using paladin's mark, then the circle gives a net +3 bonus. That's solid.

 

[FireLance]

I'm a fan of this one. Cleric one is better...except using paladin's mark, then the circle gives a net +3 bonus. That's solid.

I like it too. What makes it even better is that as written, the penalty applies to all attacks, not just those that target AC.

 

[Nifft]

I like it too. What makes it even better is that as written, the penalty applies to all attacks, not just those that target AC.

Yep. That's to compensate for the smaller radius.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Pennarin]

WHAT are you posters doing exactly? Discussing some esoteric comparaison, or even discussing whether the very idea of a comparaison is even possible...or are you proposing ways of solving the issue of the OP?

The first person to answer the OP should have suggested that the OP allow one of his two players to replace his redundant power. This should be done each time a DM discovers a power doesn't do what he thought it did, or ends up doing the same as another player's, and thus is a waste in terms of team cooperation.

Changing the rules (i.e. modifying how sacred circle works) is way more extreme and open for heated debates than bending the rules is (i.e. allowing for a retcon of the character sheet, or an impromptu retraining). Plus, bending the rules will please the player, while changing the rules will open the doors to changing other rules and so on.

EDIT: Sorry if it sounded confrontational, people. You all go on arguing if it provides you some stimulation. I sure enjoy it too sometimes.

 

[FireLance]

WHAT are you posters doing exactly? Discussing some esoteric comparaison, or even discussing whether the very idea of a comparaison is even possible...or are you proposing ways of solving the issue of the OP?

I don't know about the rest, but I'm trying to answer the question: How should sacred circle be changed to make it (1) a worthwhile use of a paladin's standard action; and (2) look decent in comparison to the 2nd-level utility powers of the other classes.

To be quite frank, I'm not sure that allowing the player to swap out the power would solve the problem since astral voice is situationally useful and martyr's blessing doesn't have very broad appeal. Sacred circle has got the right idea - it just needs a boost, IMO.

Anyway, changing the rules is pretty much the raison d'etre of the 4e Fan Creations and House Rules forum.

 

[Nifft]

Anyway, changing the rules is pretty much the raison d'etre of the 4e Fan Creations and House Rules forum.

Yeah, this hits it pretty much head on.

If a thread appears here, the poster of that thread is looking at how changes to the rules can be used to solve his problem.

WHAT we are doing is WHAT this forum exists to do.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Pennarin]

Haha, touché! Heh, again, carry on guys. Don't let old grumpy muddy the waters ;-)

 

[dangerous jack]

WHAT are you posters doing exactly? Discussing some esoteric comparaison, or even discussing whether the very idea of a comparaison is even possible...or are you proposing ways of solving the issue of the OP?

All of the above? I'm certainly enjoying the discussion, even if it has evolved a little bit beyond what I originally had in mind. I've certainly learned a bit, and there have been a number of interesting ways proposed of solving the issue.


Anyway, I really like Nifft's idea of boosting the penalty to marked enemies. I have plenty of time to sleep on it and think about how it'll play out, since it's still 3 weeks to my next game <sigh>