Binders vs Mummy Rot

[eamon]

Mummy rot uses disease mechanics but...

SRD Mummy Entry: "Mummy rot is a powerful curse, not a natural disease."

 

[Stalker0]

Where is that exactly? Just for reference. But one minute to swap out abilitites...wow!

Its the paragraph right before it describes the ritual. You can find it right before the binder class. Or you can go to feats and see it under the "Bind Vestige" feat.

Basically there's 3 parts to binding:

1) Drawing the circle (takes 1 minute)
2) Call the vestige (takes 1 full round)
3) Negotiating the pact (takes 1 minute, or 1 full round if you take a -10 to binding)

Actually if you fail to bind a vestige, you still get the abilities...its just that you are "influenced" by the Vestige.

I'm not referring to the binding part itself, I'm referring to the expel vestige feat. In order to expel a vestige, you have to go through the entire summoning process again. Meaning you must:

1) Drawing the circle (takes 1 minute)
2) Call the vestige (takes 1 full round)
3) Negotiating the pact (takes 1 minute, or 1 full round if you take a -10 to binding)

AND the feat requires you make a successful binding check. If you fail that check, you waste your 1/day expel vestige, and you are stuck with the vestige you currently have. So while expel vestige can definitely help, its not the end all be all.

 

[Nail]

Even if changing vestiges takes only 2 rounds, and even if there are no penalties for failure: It's almost always a poor choice to change vestiges in combat! 2 rounds is an eternity! If you spend 2 rounds doing essentially nothing, either you or your fellow party members are in serious trouble.

...either that, or they don't need you.

As a DM, I've used Binders as NPCs. I'm good at optimizing. And even so, the PCs tromp all over Binders. Considering I allow Warblades (et al.) in my game, you'll need to post lots of data showing Binders are over-powered.

Hint: Being immune to disease, but only if you've bound the correct vestige, is not over-powered.

 

[Hooly]

Considering the fact that I only posted a question about a players use of a Vestige, I've been surprised with the reaction of some people thinking that I'm a Binder Hater. OK, so I may have mentioned it was a mistake to let one in - fair call

However I don't mind the concept of the binder, and think that it works quite well in the setting of Pirates, Voodoo and the savagry of combating waring tribes me etc. I am however getting a scewed view of the class wthanks to the 3rd adventure in the Savage Tide AP. This dventure is just a bunch of Random Encounters thrown together into a story which means that the binder has time to prepare for whatever encounter lies ahead.

Perhaps once we get into dungeon crawling and urban environs again that the binder won't necessarily be as potent.

 

[Nifft]

Considering the fact that I only posted a question about a players use of a Vestige, I've been surprised with the reaction of some people thinking that I'm a Binder Hater. OK, so I may have mentioned it was a mistake to let one in - fair call

I think you're bumping up against something else, too, which is a basic DM philosophy around here: try to say "yes" to your players. Every now and again we'll see someone (player or DM) with an adversarial attitude, looking to use a rule or set of rules to screw the "other side" (DM or player). That's just a bad attitude.

IMHO, when a PC's ability is useful, that's solid gold. If a player has chosen exactly the correct spell to beat an encounter, good for him. Encounters exist to be beaten. Not all of them should be beaten easily, and the players should be made to sweat by some of them -- but not all, and I have even given up predicting which ones will be easy and which ones will be hard, since the difference between hard or easy is almost entirely a result of each player's choices.

So if he's got a vestige that protects him from disease, put green slime on a closed chest or doorknob. No-one else can touch it safely; he gets to look smart for a few seconds; everybody wins.

(This philosophy is also why I don't use many traps: no Rogue, no-one interested in playing a Rogue, so traps are very rare. Except magic traps, because the Wizards enjoy those.)

Cheers, -- N

 

[Hooly]

Trust me when I say that there is no "anti-player" DM living here. In fact some of my players say that I'm too generous at times allowing goals to be kicked through without even trying - my philosophy is that if it looks good on screen, chances are it will occur (another reason I use a modified version of action points). However I am a big one for consistency.

I agree that the ability the player chose is the best one for the job, and the player has certainly made a "good choice". I just wanted to get a ruling to remain consistent as the rules from the different areas (i.e. Remove Curse, Remove Disease, Mummy Rot, and the two binder abilitites) didn't seem to read well together.

I discussed my ruling (as mentioned above) with the player in question, and he was happy with the result.

All is now good and so we can move on and continue to have fun.

 

[Nail]

I think you're bumping up against something else, too, which is a basic DM philosophy around here: try to say "yes" to your players. Every now and again we'll see someone (player or DM) with an adversarial attitude, looking to use a rule or set of rules to screw the "other side" (DM or player). That's just a bad attitude.

IMHO, when a PC's ability is useful, that's solid gold. If a player has chosen exactly the correct spell to beat an encounter, good for him. Encounters exist to be beaten. Not all of them should be beaten easily, and the players should be made to sweat by some of them -- but not all, and I have even given up predicting which ones will be easy and which ones will be hard, since the difference between hard or easy is almost entirely a result of each player's choices.

So if he's got a vestige that protects him from disease, put green slime on a closed chest or doorknob. No-one else can touch it safely; he gets to look smart for a few seconds; everybody wins.

QFT!

It's posts like these that keep me paying attention to yours, Nifft.