johnsemlak
First Post
I don't think you can blame the sacred strike feat for that entirely. 15 extra points in one round is the result of a character combining two feats to improve damage. Perhaps TWF is not balenced in this case?
Book of Exalted Deeds: A fundamental design philosophy shift at WotC?
I don't think you can blame the sacred strike feat for that entirely. 15 extra points in one round is the result of a character combining two feats to improve damage. Perhaps TWF is not balenced in this case?
spacecrime.com
First Post
What I find interesting about Nymph's Kiss is that it gives you a major gameplay reward for forfilling a goal that can only be accomplished through roleplaying. That's a very interesting carrot to dangle in front of a player who focuses on tactics and character improvement.
cheers,
cheers,
Last edited:
Numion
First Post
Hardhead said:
Fighters get more attacks, Weapons Spec works on all targets, fighters have bigger to-attack bonuses and rogues are useless in combat against undead and constructs (not so uncommon at higher levels). So I'd say it might just even out. At least by my experiences, rogues might use a little boost in combat.
WizarDru
Adventurer
Of course, it's not an extra +15 points, because using TWF results in a lower probability of success, which needs to be factored into the average. Not having a head for math, I couldn't tell you what that actual number becomes, but it's probably around +12. Compared with what a bow-fighter or mage is doing at that level, it's not that impressive, especially when you consider how often it isn't applicable to many targets or in many situations.Hardhead said:
My general feeling is that the BoED is neither very interesting or very disappointing. It's just....dull. Uninspired. It still felt very mechanical, to me. I generally am not a big fan of RP-costs for mechanical advantages, but I'm not violently opposed to them, either. My biggest complaint about BoED is that I need to accept their cosmology nearly in toto, which I don't much care to do. And while I realize things like Rheks and Hollyphants may have been pre-existing entities....I think they're just kind of silly. I'll use some of the material...but it all felt very hollow inside. Half of the spells appeared to be flavorless and dull....'make this holy', 'make this good', make this do half fire/half hoy damage' and so on. Yawn.
Psion
Adventurer
Numion said:
In my experience, sneak attack is pretty potent as is.
Taken at 10th level, it may be reasonable (may...), perhaps on the level of weapon specialization.
But here's the thing... unlike weapon specialization, it keeps getting better. Every time you get a new sneak attack dice, it adds an extra point of damage on the average. That makes the feat very attractive. Perhaps too attractive.
tzor
First Post
Hardhead said:
Well let's roll back the clock to the beginning of AD&D time. What is the paladin? Mechanics power for RP restrictions (lawful good). What is the druid? Mechanics power for RP restrictions (neutural).
That notion is not new. It is as old as the game itself, probably back when elves were a class.
The BOED has some powerfull stuff, but I am not sure that all that power is really that powerfull. VOP isn't for the faint of heart, and in fact goes against most roleplayer's ideas of the game ... he who has the most toys at the end wins!
As for Nymph's Kiss, Having a relationship with a nymph is something you are told never to do by your parents, "Those type of things will make you go blind."
Love may be blind, but you're going to need blinders or go blind in that relationship quickly. And of course, you now have someone who the BBEG can blackmail you with.So considering that these feats are only given by the gods and have significant restrictions on the character, I can't see how they can be considered exceptionally overpowered and a change from the normal mentality at WOTC.
Metallian
First Post
WizarDru said:
I personally love that stuff...I find the imagery of "flaming holy righteous wrath" or whatever to be very compelling. I liked the evil versions in the BoVD, too. Not enough of that sort of thing in the PHB, in my opinion.
I don't have the book yet, because neither my Half-Celestial nor my wife's Paladin are due for any feats anytime soon, but it is on my Amazon.com Wish List.
The Metallian
Psion
Adventurer
It's not new, but it is commonly considered faulty and we know better now. This philosophy brought use abominations like the UA Cavalier and Barbarian... powers in exchange for attitude problems.
I am all for encouraging flavor, but IMO/E, it is best if any benefits garnered from such are slight, if any. I think 3e did well to do away with the notion of mechanical benefits for roleplaying drawbacks, and I think it is a mistake to invite it back.
spacecrime.com
First Post
Psion said:
True, but I'm not sure that's what's happening here.
The problem with the older mechanics is that they're "give me a hamburger today and I will gladly pay you Tuesday" rules. You get neat benefits now for promising to engage in possibly inconvenient behavior later. There are players for whom that approach works fine, but there are also players who will either be unable to fulfill that promise or will do so at inappropriate times in the game.
By contrast, a feat like Nymph's Kiss rewards you after you've "paid the cost" by taking unusual and somewhat difficult actions. You get something really cool, but not until you've done something to deserve it. The approach works the same way as treasure -- you don't get the treasure before you go into the dungeon, you get it after you've kicked the dragon's butt.
cheers,
spacecrime.com said:
And yet, if you give the PC an overpowered item for defeating the dragon, you're still left with a PC with an item that can throw the game out of whack. Same thing here..just because you set up a difficult task for the PC to accomplish in order to get the feat doesn't make the feat balanced. In fact, there's a danger that a DM could end up making it too easy a challenge.
