Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Goober4473" data-source="post: 7007989" data-attributes="member: 6675240">I'll likely add some more fluff as the mechanics get more solid. I wanted to move away from alignment as a primary determining factor though, and turn the necrocarnate from &quot;the worst evil imaginable&quot; to &quot;kind of spooky&quot; to allow it as a real player option outside of pure evil games.I feel like attacking a villager would make it hostile. The wording is mostly there to allow the DM to make the final call. A harmless bunny rabbit is probably not challenging enough to kill to really count, while a random villager might be at lower levels, but less so later. Basically, I want to avoid the &quot;torch an anthill&quot; problem with that ability in 3.5.I definitely want to differentiate soulborn from paladins. They always felt, in 3.5, like a sort of knock-off paladin with some incarnate soulmelds, instead of their own unique thing. Do you think giving them a (mostly) unique soulmeld list, as well as martial weapon and heavy armor proficiency doesn't do the job of keeping them different feeling from other incarnates?I really wanted to keep the &quot;choose from all soulmelds from the start&quot; feel of the original. Since you &quot;prepare&quot; them each day, this mostly works like a cleric or druid having access to their whole spell list, which works fine. Rapid Meldshaping allows them to swap out quickly, but &quot;extreme versatility&quot; is ultimately the incarnate's niche.I think having level-based soulmelds makes it too complicated, and limits things too much. Soulmelds currently all share a progression of basic effect, essentia effect that improves based on regular chakras, and greater chakra powers, and I like that setup a lot.As for splitting up the incarnate soulmelds, it's one of the main ways the different subclasses are differentiated from each other. Allowing much more cross-pollination than is currently available might serve to blend the subclasses too much, and 20 options is already quite a lot. Perhaps earlier access to a little bit of Diverse Meldshaping would help?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Goober4473, post: 7007989, member: 6675240"] I'll likely add some more fluff as the mechanics get more solid. I wanted to move away from alignment as a primary determining factor though, and turn the necrocarnate from "the worst evil imaginable" to "kind of spooky" to allow it as a real player option outside of pure evil games. I feel like attacking a villager would make it hostile. The wording is mostly there to allow the DM to make the final call. A harmless bunny rabbit is probably not challenging enough to kill to really count, while a random villager might be at lower levels, but less so later. Basically, I want to avoid the "torch an anthill" problem with that ability in 3.5. I definitely want to differentiate soulborn from paladins. They always felt, in 3.5, like a sort of knock-off paladin with some incarnate soulmelds, instead of their own unique thing. Do you think giving them a (mostly) unique soulmeld list, as well as martial weapon and heavy armor proficiency doesn't do the job of keeping them different feeling from other incarnates? I really wanted to keep the "choose from all soulmelds from the start" feel of the original. Since you "prepare" them each day, this mostly works like a cleric or druid having access to their whole spell list, which works fine. Rapid Meldshaping allows them to swap out quickly, but "extreme versatility" is ultimately the incarnate's niche. I think having level-based soulmelds makes it too complicated, and limits things too much. Soulmelds currently all share a progression of basic effect, essentia effect that improves based on regular chakras, and greater chakra powers, and I like that setup a lot. As for splitting up the incarnate soulmelds, it's one of the main ways the different subclasses are differentiated from each other. Allowing much more cross-pollination than is currently available might serve to blend the subclasses too much, and 20 options is already quite a lot. Perhaps earlier access to a little bit of Diverse Meldshaping would help? [/QUOTE]

Verification