Heroics and stunning surge...any errata

[iceifur]

OTOH, given that I've long had a problem with just how many things stack, and how long it can take a high-level party to prep for a single combat, maybe I should give the more restrictive interpretation a shot...

That's the way I see it. If there are two perfectly viable interpretations of a given rule, and one of those interpretations causes fewer headaches ...

 

[Cephid]

ok, so we have the usual disagreements about the letter of the law, but what about fairness?

I don't know where they were first printed either. If it was some silly old unplay tested book, or something more ballanced.
I like to restrict overpowered things in my games even if the rules say its ok.

So, what do you think? (about all three)
which can be abused too much to be reasonable, and which are ok to keep in my game?

 

[Cephid]

"No more reason to pick up weapon spec feats "

thats the kind of thing I am worried about. It might change the way characters pick feats and even make certain classes redundant.

With a sorcerer in the group, now the parties monk and cleric can have power attack, cleave, greater cleave, whole chains of enemy specific feats and catch up or even overtake the fighter in number of feats, and hence effectiveness in combat.

What about the cleric archer build? All it was lacking was feats, but with this spell (maybe from "any spell") they get all the feats too.

 

[Quartz]

Would you allow the spell to grant an Epic fighter feat? I suggest not.

 

[TessarrianDM]

...It says the subject can use the feat as if he selected it, not that he is treated as having selected it. And since the target must meet the prereqs, a feat granted by the spell does not qualify.

I agree wholeheartedly. This interpretation eliminates the problem without eliminating access to the spell, and keeps it in line with the spell level.

I am not familiar with the two weapon abilities.

 

[Cephid]

Sounds good. I'll allow the spell, but the feats it grants can't be used as prereques for others.

I am not familiar with the two weapon abilities.

Stunning surge:
+1 bonus
On successful attack, take swift action to emmit a magic surge.
Victim makes fort save vs DC=1/2 character level + cha modifier + 10.
stunned for 1 rnd
uses/day=cha modifier.

(I want to use if for my melee sorcerer)


Spell strike
+1 bonus
as a free action, user can transfer some or all of weapons enhancement bonus to saves vs spells and spell like abilities. This effect lasts 1 rnd.
Unlimited use per day. i.e. permanent unless you want to take a different free action.

(thought it could be abused by a non melee spell caster with greater magic weapon on it.) at level 20 its a +2 weapon that gives a +5 save bonus all day.

So what do you think about them?