Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Homebrew Elven PrC - Seeking Critique
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Khaalis" data-source="post: 1734900" data-attributes="member: 2167"><p>Thanks for the comments Handforged. Hopefully the other author (also a member here) will reply as well. However, I will do the best I can.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>We purposely were avoiding powers similar to the Spellsword, basically any spell channeling abilities as neither of us really like the mechanic. The magic/swordplay combination comes in the Stormblade’s ability to magically enchant their weapon a number of times per day with electrical energy, as well as through their inhuman speed. The spellcaster levels come because it is part of the requirement of these PrCs to be gish (warrior-mages). Also keep in mind that this is a very limited access PrC. With that said…</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Ok, here goes… I agree BAB might be an issue. Most gish PrC’s meet in the middle ground with Intermediate BAB.</p><p></p><p>2 good saves is common for many classes, I don’t really see an issue with this.</p><p></p><p>Skill Points: This is a personal preference of our own Homebrews as we run very skill intensive games and found the skill system lacking in most cases versus the skill versatility we feel most classes should have. Thus we have raised all classes by 2 skill points. In a “normal” PrC description, this would appear as 2+INT.</p><p></p><p>Feats:</p><p>I could be persuaded to drop the +1 attack bonus when wielding both Scimitar and Sickle, however… </p><p></p><p>What you are counting as 5 feats, are not all truly feats, they are only virtual feats and thus gained only under specific circumstances, unlike a real feat. The Achilles heel of this fighting style is Disarm. Remove one weapon and the class loses most of its abilities.</p><p></p><p>Weapon Focus: You cant really say that the class gains Weapon Focus (Scimitar) and Weapon Focus (Sickle) as this is untrue. They gain a +1 attack bonus when wielding both. There are times when it will not be possible to dual wield and the bonuses are not gained for the single weapon.</p><p></p><p>Weapon Finesse: This also is not the standard feat. The feat grants its benefits to all light weapons, rapiers, whips, and spiked chains. The virtual feat simply mimics the benefit of the feat when specifically wielding a scimitar and sickle combination. Not in any other situation. Also note that the scimitar is only considered Light, when used in combination with the sickle.</p><p></p><p>You suggest dropping Two-Weapon Style but this is part of the core of the fighting style. It may be too much to gain GTWF however. Although the earliest it would be gained would be at 11th level and BAB +7. Thus I agree we should drop GTWF, but keep ITWF but move it to 5th.</p><p></p><p>20’ Movement: I personally agree on lower than 20’ on this but my partner was insistent on this. He may relent once seeing comments.</p><p></p><p>Why Lightning Blade to 3rd when Blossom of Light stays at 4th? Shouldn’t there be more of a spacing between the abilities? I also wanted to keep the (Su) abilities linked to the spell level advancement.</p><p></p><p>If we make the concessions and the partner agrees, the new table would appear thusly…</p><p></p><p>[Code]</p><p>[b] Base</p><p>Class Attack SAVES</p><p>Level Bonus Fort Ref Will Special[/b]</p><p>1 +0 +0 +2 +2 Storm Blade Style, Fast Movement +5’</p><p>2 +1 +0 +3 +3 Lightning Blade, +1 level of existing arcane spellcasting class</p><p>3 +2 +1 +3 +3 Fast Movement +10’, Rolling Thunder</p><p>4 +3 +1 +4 +4 Blossom of Light, +1 level of existing arcane spellcasting class</p><p>5 +3 +1 +4 +4 Fast Movement +15’, Eye of the Storm, Improved Style</p><p>[/code]</p><p></p><p>I think this looks better.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In the campaign, PrC’s would e more tightly controlled. Spellsword and Bladesinger may not even exist, and Harper Paragon definitely would not. However, I will have to crunch some examples with other PrCs.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Minimum would be Ranger 3/Wizard 3 (+4 BAB requirement) and it does make a good entry combination to the class, as does Ftr2/Wiz4, Bard6, Rog4/Wiz3, etc. However, in your example a Ranger 2 / Wizard 3 / Stormblade 5 (with +5 BAB) would only be +8 BAB. </p><p></p><p>At the minimum Ranger 3 / Wizard 3 / Stormblade 5 - saves at 10th would be decent at F +5 / R +8 / W +8. Compare that to any single class that gets 2 or more good saves at 7/3/7 or 7/7/7 – it is not far off, gaining only the slight advantage Any class gains fro multiclassing saves (benefiting from more than one starting save).</p><p></p><p>Skills are still mediocre restricted to the small skill list of class skill, especially if you assume the standard 2+INT skill points.</p><p></p><p>With the changes, does it look better?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Khaalis, post: 1734900, member: 2167"] Thanks for the comments Handforged. Hopefully the other author (also a member here) will reply as well. However, I will do the best I can. We purposely were avoiding powers similar to the Spellsword, basically any spell channeling abilities as neither of us really like the mechanic. The magic/swordplay combination comes in the Stormblade’s ability to magically enchant their weapon a number of times per day with electrical energy, as well as through their inhuman speed. The spellcaster levels come because it is part of the requirement of these PrCs to be gish (warrior-mages). Also keep in mind that this is a very limited access PrC. With that said… Ok, here goes… I agree BAB might be an issue. Most gish PrC’s meet in the middle ground with Intermediate BAB. 2 good saves is common for many classes, I don’t really see an issue with this. Skill Points: This is a personal preference of our own Homebrews as we run very skill intensive games and found the skill system lacking in most cases versus the skill versatility we feel most classes should have. Thus we have raised all classes by 2 skill points. In a “normal” PrC description, this would appear as 2+INT. Feats: I could be persuaded to drop the +1 attack bonus when wielding both Scimitar and Sickle, however… What you are counting as 5 feats, are not all truly feats, they are only virtual feats and thus gained only under specific circumstances, unlike a real feat. The Achilles heel of this fighting style is Disarm. Remove one weapon and the class loses most of its abilities. Weapon Focus: You cant really say that the class gains Weapon Focus (Scimitar) and Weapon Focus (Sickle) as this is untrue. They gain a +1 attack bonus when wielding both. There are times when it will not be possible to dual wield and the bonuses are not gained for the single weapon. Weapon Finesse: This also is not the standard feat. The feat grants its benefits to all light weapons, rapiers, whips, and spiked chains. The virtual feat simply mimics the benefit of the feat when specifically wielding a scimitar and sickle combination. Not in any other situation. Also note that the scimitar is only considered Light, when used in combination with the sickle. You suggest dropping Two-Weapon Style but this is part of the core of the fighting style. It may be too much to gain GTWF however. Although the earliest it would be gained would be at 11th level and BAB +7. Thus I agree we should drop GTWF, but keep ITWF but move it to 5th. 20’ Movement: I personally agree on lower than 20’ on this but my partner was insistent on this. He may relent once seeing comments. Why Lightning Blade to 3rd when Blossom of Light stays at 4th? Shouldn’t there be more of a spacing between the abilities? I also wanted to keep the (Su) abilities linked to the spell level advancement. If we make the concessions and the partner agrees, the new table would appear thusly… [Code] [b] Base Class Attack SAVES Level Bonus Fort Ref Will Special[/b] 1 +0 +0 +2 +2 Storm Blade Style, Fast Movement +5’ 2 +1 +0 +3 +3 Lightning Blade, +1 level of existing arcane spellcasting class 3 +2 +1 +3 +3 Fast Movement +10’, Rolling Thunder 4 +3 +1 +4 +4 Blossom of Light, +1 level of existing arcane spellcasting class 5 +3 +1 +4 +4 Fast Movement +15’, Eye of the Storm, Improved Style [/code] I think this looks better. In the campaign, PrC’s would e more tightly controlled. Spellsword and Bladesinger may not even exist, and Harper Paragon definitely would not. However, I will have to crunch some examples with other PrCs. Minimum would be Ranger 3/Wizard 3 (+4 BAB requirement) and it does make a good entry combination to the class, as does Ftr2/Wiz4, Bard6, Rog4/Wiz3, etc. However, in your example a Ranger 2 / Wizard 3 / Stormblade 5 (with +5 BAB) would only be +8 BAB. At the minimum Ranger 3 / Wizard 3 / Stormblade 5 - saves at 10th would be decent at F +5 / R +8 / W +8. Compare that to any single class that gets 2 or more good saves at 7/3/7 or 7/7/7 – it is not far off, gaining only the slight advantage Any class gains fro multiclassing saves (benefiting from more than one starting save). Skills are still mediocre restricted to the small skill list of class skill, especially if you assume the standard 2+INT skill points. With the changes, does it look better? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Homebrew Elven PrC - Seeking Critique
Top