Excerpts: Angels

[DandD]

Something I noticed in the Angel of Vengeance tactics.



Emphasis mine. Maybe I'm missing something, but:

Sign of Vengeance: minor action
Teleport: move action
Double Attack: standard action.

Is the action point necessary to activate double attack? Or is spending an action point to make 4 attacks against the target? The way it's written it sounds, it sounds like the former, but nothing in the statblock indicates that Double Attack needs an action point to activate, does it?

Probably a case of writers not really knowing the rules themselves well. Actually, that doesn't bold well for the Monster Manual. I sure hope it's written less confusing than that. I don't like to see tons of errata coming up soonly, just because the writers didn't proofread their own stuff.

 

[Green Knight]

OK tactics question:

So Sign of Vengence is a Minor, the teleport is a move action, so we have one standard action left why does it need to burn an action point to attack twice? Or does it mean just use the action point to get 2 double attacks?

Pretty much. Nothing wrong with an extra Standard Action. And in this case, it's pretty powerful. Angel of Vengeance pops in, spots the guy he's after, and uses a Minor Action to put a Sign of Vengeance on him. Then he uses a Move Action to teleport next to him. Then he uses a Standard Action to make a Double Attack, inflicting 2d10+18 damage, plus 2d8 fire damage, plus 2d8 cold damage if he hits both times. Then he burns his Action Point for another Standard Action, so he can make another Double Attack. So assuming all four attacks hit, he'll have inflicted between 48-140 points of damage (94 average) right on the first turn!

 

[That One Guy]

now we can fight angels! but more importantly... only 2 days till we learn the basics of multiclassing!

Yeah, I'm feeling pretty good about the angels. A bit skimpy, however... overall I think I can roll with the update and use it.

But, I hope for as skimpy as this one was, the wednesday multiclass thing will be juicy and awesome. Only wednesday!

 

[Ravingdork]

Ooh...pretty...

I'm not sure that I like the faceless servents aspect of the new Angels, though it does make them much more alien and unnerving. Their swirly misty tails make me think of them more as genie-kind then angels too (just take away the wings).

The whole mercenary background wreaks of wrongness to me. I love that they are servents of all gods, but now the gods have to make it worth their while somehow? :nonono:

 

[MaelStorm]

DC 25: Influential members of a clergy use a ritual to call forth their deity’s wrath in the form of one of these angels.

Emphasis mine

Some ritual looks quite powerful. I like it.

I also like the mercenary aspect of Angels.

 

[Fallen Seraph]

Probably will be missed too, but... The level 8, Angel of Valor doesn't have Immunity to Disease like the level 19, Angel of Vengeance.

I dunno about you guys, but the idea of an Angel racked by disease, left to die on the World just screams plot-hook.

 

[Rechan]

"I'm an angel. I kill firstborns while their mamas watch. I turn cities into salt. I even, when I feel like it, rip the souls from little girls, and from now till kingdom come, the only thing you can count on in your existence is never understanding why." -Gabriel (The Prophecy)

 

[sunbear]

I LOVE 4E and am waiting with terrible excitement for it....However, the Angels don't have legs, man! I am really surprised how much this is bothering me. It looks stupid (IMO), if they wanted them to have a connection to the astral plane they could have simply made them translucent or maybe the wings could fade away into the astral (hard to make as a mini)...I dunno, but not the legs.

 

[Colmarr]

Probably a case of writers not really knowing the rules themselves well. Actually, that doesn't bold well for the Monster Manual. I sure hope it's written less confusing than that. I don't like to see tons of errata coming up soonly, just because the writers didn't proofread their own stuff.

Actually, it seems to me like one of those powers changed action type somewhere in the development process and they didn't revisit the tactics section to correct it.

Either way, I agree with you that it doesn't necessarily bode well.

 

[FadedC]

The whole mercenary background wreaks of wrongness to me. I love that they are servents of all gods, but now the gods have to make it worth their while somehow? :nonono:

Keep in mind that one of the things they will work for is a a "cause worthy of their attention"