Excerpt: Paragon paths (merged)

[Storm-Bringer]

Only if I can have my dragonborn warlock's eldritch blast come from his mouth, and call it "Imma Firin Mah Lazar!"

You, sir, have won the internets.

 

[DandD]

I somehow get the feeling that the basic heroic tier classes and the more specialised paragon path-level system feels like it's inspired by D20 Modern. There, you only had 6 basic classes who could advance to level 10, and to progress further, they either needed to multiclass, or they took advanced classes. Of course, advanced classes could be take far far earlier than prestige classes and the 4th edition paragon paths.
I guess the developers took that level progression idea from there.

 

[MindWright]

Extra Damage Action and Order of Actions

Why are you assuming the action point needs to be spent on the second standard action you take in a turn? The player can decide what order to take their actions in right?

So instead of:

Warpriest in combat with orc.
Standard action: Warpriest attacks orc 1. Reduces it to 3 hp.
Move action: Warpriest moves to orc 2, taking a OA and 10hp damage from orc 1.
Action Point: Warpriest uses an action point to attack orc 2. As soon as he spends the action point, orc 1 keels over and dies.

You get:
Action Point: Warpriest attacks orc 1. Orc 1 keels over and dies.
Move action: Warpriest moves to orc 2 without penalty.
Standard Action: Warpriest attacks orc 2.

Instead of:

Move action: Warpriest moves into melee with orc.
Standard action: Warpriest attacks orc 1. Reduces it to 3 hp.
Action Point: Warpriest uses his action point to take an extra action. Orc keels over. The Warpriest is left with no other targets.

You get:
Move action: Warpriest moves into melee with orc.
Action Point: Warpriest attacks orc. Orc keels over and dies.
Warpriest still has a Standard and a Minor action available, and the standard action can be taken as a move if desired. If you attack with the standard action you get the bonus damage.

The only one that is an issue is this one:

Standard Action: Warpriest uses Cascade of light. Reduces orc to 10hp. Makes it vulnerable radiant 5.
Action Point: Warpriest does something. Orc takes 5 points of extra damage from the Cascade of Light. The ability is radiant and the ork is now vulnerable 5 to radiant damage so it takes a total of 10 damage. The orc dies.

The problem is that the orc doesn't take damage from Cascade of Light twice, only once.

If you use the action point for the Cascade of Light you get the bonus from your Extra Damage Action ability, but you don't inflict damage a second time to take advantage of the vulnerability, at least not yet.

So I think it goes:
Action Point: Warpriest uses Cascade of Light. Reduces orc to 5hp. Makes it vulnerable radiant 5.
Free Action: Power of the Amaunator, Cascade of Light deals an additional 1d10 damage, on a roll of 5+ the orc dies. You still don't get the bonus vulnerability damage because this power adds to the damage of Cascade of Light it doesn't create new radiant damage.

The Warpriest still has a move, a standard action, and a minor action available. If he uses the standard action to inflict radiant damage on the orc, it will die.

I'm not sure why you are assuming the action point has to be spent on the last action, with this power spending it on the first action makes much more sense.

 

[Carnivorous_Bean]

There's only one thing that I don't like about the paragon paths, and that's the "kensai" stuff. As the runner of a pretty European-based campaign world, I dislike having that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description. In particular, because a slight change -- you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor.

Sigh.

 

[Lacyon]

There's only one thing that I don't like about the paragon paths, and that's the "kensai" stuff. As the runner of a pretty European-based campaign world, I dislike having that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description. In particular, because a slight change -- you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor.

Sigh.

What does "that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description" mean?

“My weapon and I are as one.”
...
You study an ancient form of martial training that makes you one with your chosen weapon, creating a combination of destruction that few foes can long stand against.

I'm not seeing how that doesn't fit with "you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor."

The only "oriental" flavor is in the name, that I see. The only thing we've seen that the Kensei actually gives you is, in essence, weapon specialization. You could just call it the Fighter paragon path for what it's worth.

 

[Andor]

“Let loose the gift of battle!” - This isn't a mixed metaphor, it's a pureed one.

“When you need something dead, you’ll be hard pressed to find someone better at the job than me.” - Is this an assasin or a grave robber?

“This weapon is my symbol of office, and it shines over the field of battle as I wield it against our enemies.” - Symbol of office? Shines over the battlefield? Is he fighting with a key-to-the-city +3?

WotC needs to hire a cruel and powerful flavor text editor, who causes pain to writers who turn in stuff like this. A beholder with hemorrhoids would be ideal.

 

[katahn]

There's only one thing that I don't like about the paragon paths, and that's the "kensai" stuff. As the runner of a pretty European-based campaign world, I dislike having that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description. In particular, because a slight change -- you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor.

Sigh.

Ok, change the names to fit your campaign. "Kensai" becomes "Swordmaster" or "Weaponmaster". Alternatively you could replace "master" in the name with "saint" if you want something closer to the actual translation if I recall correctly.

It just seems pretty silly to take issue with what the paragon path is named to me.

 

[DandD]

Fortunately for D&D 4th edition, it won't be westerner either, nor arabic, mezzo-american or hindi. It will be fantasy, where everything the gaming group accepts for themselves can play without disturbance from others.

 

[Storm-Bringer]

There's only one thing that I don't like about the paragon paths, and that's the "kensai" stuff. As the runner of a pretty European-based campaign world, I dislike having that oriental flavor hard-wired into the description. In particular, because a slight change -- you are privy to the secrets of an ancient technique of swordsmanship -- would make it fit in with oriental, European, Aztec, Sumerian, or none-of-the-above based campaign flavor.

Sigh.

Yeah, worse is the descriptions they have been using since that Spell Compendium:

Your god demands battle to accomplish the tenets of your faith, and you are the chosen priest at the forefront of the war. When you call upon your divine powers, your weapons glow with holy light.

Whoa, there, Chester. I am reading a book, pretending to be an Elf. I don't need this kind of assistance to get into the game. Let's go back to neutral pronouns, shall we?

 

[Lizard]

WotC needs to hire a cruel and powerful flavor text editor, who causes pain to writers who turn in stuff like this. A beholder with hemorrhoids would be ideal.

Hey, give them credit where it's due. There's no Purple Octopus Eats Bananas Attack type stuff in there, and for that, I am very grateful.