[D&D 3.5]To the Death [Taking Alternates]

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Okay, thanks. I'll post the altered Nac in the RG now.

 

[No Way]

Also, accepted people, please read instructions in the RG thread, thanks.

 

[Kelleris]

Where is this RG thread? I'm new to PbP games, so I haven't picked up on the lingo yet.

EDIT: Right. RG = Rogue's Gallery. Gotcha.

I changed my character sheet to reflect the current state of affairs, as I didn't get a chance to upload a final version before the boards went down. I added a flaw (vulnerable), a counterbalancing feat (Cleave), a trait (aggressive), and some of the cantrips I asked about. I'm reposting the sheet here for you convenience, No Way.

EDIT: Deleted the character sheet in this post. You can find the final sheet in the Rogue's Gallery here.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Out of curiosity, No Way, which version of Arcane Strike did you decide to use? I'm personally in favor of the Complete Warrior one, because I think the other one unbalances the game in favor of sorcerers.

 

[Kelleris]

Hrm, how so? The CW version favors characters with iterative attacks, but I don't see why that makes it better. Sorcs don't tend to have iterative attacks, but they don't tend to attack much either - they can't qualify until 8th level, and would only use it for ray and touch spells, which virtually always hit anyway, meaning that the greater bonus to attacks is pretty much a wash anyway, more so because it's capped at your BAB. For a sorcerer, that means the CW version's lower attack boost is enforced anyway, and they don't receive any additional bonuses after 12th level. I'd say that's pretty much a wash - it's weaker at higher levels, and offers a point/spell level more damage before that. I see the CW version as being biased toward a dual-wielder, which has no justifiable flavor justification, and can make for some broken non-sorcerer characters down the road.

Incidentally, Nac, your hps seem a little off. 5d12 + 1d10 + 30 is 12 (first level) + 26 (6.5 * 4) + 6 (5.5 rounded up) + 30 (Con bonus) = 74.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

You're probably right on the hp thing, I'm not too good at it.

My point is that at low levels, a character like yours gets entirely too much benefit from that feat if you use your rules. Sacrificing a second level spell (which isn't hard for a sorcerer type character) will get you +4 to hit and +4d6 damage. That's really quite a lot. You're talking about a +14 bonus to damage there. Compare that to the CW version that gives +2 to hit and +5 damage. If you assume WotC had some idea of game balance, you have to say that adding +4.5 damage per spell level is a bit over the top. I don't disagree with the +2 instead of +1 to hit, it's just the damage seems a little ridiculous to me.

 

[Kelleris]

Did I mistype in my first post? It's only 1d6 damage per spell level dropped. 2d6 would be a bit much, I agree. Dropping a 1st-level spell would give me +2 attack/+1d6 damage and a 2nd-level spell +4 attack/+2d6 damage.

 

[Nac Mac Feegle]

Oh. That does make it better . But I still just want to know from No Way which you'll be using.

 

[Kelleris]

Oh, and I forgot to mention that both versions only function on melee attacks - so there goes my dream of a ray-casting sorcerer of arcane-striking doom, if I ever had one.

 

[No Way]

Im going to use the dragon variant, since its 1d6. If Temmujin dosnt confirm that hes playing in the game by tommorow night, I'm going to drop him and pick one of the other applicants.