LEB Discussion Thread '09

[elecgraystone]

The AC 25 Avenger is the anti-defender for melee enemies. That high of an AC ENCOURAGES enemies to move on to easier targets and the Avenger can't do anything to penalize them for doing so.

I'll have to disagree with Vertexx69 on Avengers being defenders. In all honesty, my infernal warlock is more of a defender. My AC is low enough that they can actually have a chance to hit me and I have enough HP and temp HP to keep standing.

 

[stonegod]

Probably should move this particularly discussion to a proposal thread so as not to derail the intent of this one (getting LEB4E up an running).

Judge recruiting is progressing. Hope to have an official announcement on that front in the next day or so.

 

[TwoHeadsBarking]

In all honesty, my infernal warlock is more of a defender. My AC is low enough that they can actually have a chance to hit me and I have enough HP and temp HP to keep standing.

Another strike against Hellish Rebuke!

 

[ukingsken]

So just kind of picking through whats been said so far would this be a fair summary for proposed sources for LEB Character Creation? That seems to be one of the things still under discussion and hopefully summarizing it can get us back on track. That and I'm not yet ready to wrap my head back around "Which wealth over time system is better" debate.

• The three core books: Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual
• Eberron Players Guide
• Forgotten Realms Players Guide (Races & Classes - Reflavored Spellscars yes/no?)
• Players Handbook 2
• Monster Manual (For Monstrous Races)
• Arcane Power
• Martial Power
• Manual of The Planes
• Adventurers Vault

Now beyond adding or subtracting to that list there are also a couple things I know that were issues of contention in L4W when they were approved there, specifically:

• Double Weapons and Oversized/Brutal weapons in Adventurer's vault (Discussion here.)
• Whether or not damage from the Dark Pact powers in FRPG should be voluntary or involuntary (Discussion here.)
• Whether or not to drop implement/weapon expertise feats from PHB 2 and just fix the broken math that they seem to be a patch for (Discussion here.)

So what are everyones thoughts on this stuff? Are we okay accepting what L4W has done, do we ditch some of their bans? Or do we need to nerf things they missed? I just grabbed most of these straight off the L4W creation guide, and personally can't think of anything else except Rageblood Vigor (Which as far as I'm concerned recent Erratta fixed).

 

[Vertexx69]

I was just ranting about Avengers, don't mind me I only found the swordmage today.

I think that the 3 items for advanced character creation should be left as is from the DMG. If people want to start at lvl 1, they can't complain about any sort of power gap when they have the same opportunity as the higher lvls.

Has the lvl 4 creation cap been set in stone yet?

I thought they removed the oversized racial feature in the errata, or at least on DDI?

Is there actually technical game info in the eberron players guide or is it just flavor and background?

Any other thoughts yay or nay to the attack power and armor I mentioned above from quintessential fighter?

 

[TwoHeadsBarking]

Double Weapons and Oversized/Brutal weapons in Adventurer's vault (Discussion here.)

Hasn't Wizards said that Oversized was a mistake on their part? It seems that we could avoid the issue L4W has by not allowing Oversized from the start. Oh, I guess Bugbears take it in the teeth then. Hmmm, I need to think about this.

I have no opinion on double weapons. I think they're a little silly, but so's a lot of stuff in D&D.

Whether or not damage from the Dark Pact powers in FRPG should be voluntary or involuntary (Discussion here.)

I think you should need the other players' (not characters') permission to hurt them with your powers. It's just courtesy. I know I'd ask my group in RL if they were ok with me taking those powers, and I'd expect the same from them. Besides, most of those powers are pretty lackluster. The level 1 daily is alright, but the rest give terrible returns on the damage you dealt to your "friends".

Whether or not to drop implement/weapon expertise feats from PHB 2 and just fix the broken math that they seem to be a patch for (Discussion here.)

Man, if we're starting at level 3 or 4, the L4W fix is pretty attractive. Given the lower point buy of LEB (it's 22, right?) the argument for making suboptimal race/class combinations better is stronger than I think it was in L4W.

I don't like the feat (I think it's boring), I think everyone's going to take it eventually, and it's especially taxing to those classes who don't just use one weapon/implement. If this were just my game, I'd use the L4W fix (since that's what I did in RL before it came up there). So I guess I suggest we do the same here.

 

[ukingsken]

Hasn't Wizards said that Oversized was a mistake on their part? It seems that we could avoid the issue L4W has by not allowing Oversized from the start. Oh, I guess Bugbears take it in the teeth then. Hmmm, I need to think about this.

Well Oversized has been basically Errata'd out so yeah I think that's basically a non issue, although it does definitely nerf bugbears quite badly. But without the nerf Oversize can be abused, very badly.

I have no opinion on double weapons. I think they're a little silly, but so's a lot of stuff in D&D.

With double weapons there was some issue about it just being "too good" as written, I'd have to read it over again but I remember agreeing with the nerf (We ended up keeping them for flavor purposes only but mechanically running them as 2 seperate weapons).

I think you should need the other players' (not characters') permission to hurt them with your powers. It's just courtesy. I know I'd ask my group in RL if they were ok with me taking those powers, and I'd expect the same from them. Besides, most of those powers are pretty lackluster. The level 1 daily is alright, but the rest give terrible returns on the damage you dealt to your "friends".

Having a player as opposed to characters permission was what I meant, regardless of what I said hahaha. But yeah I just think that will avoid any ooc nastiness. Maybe a no brainer but important regardless.

Man, if we're starting at level 3 or 4, the L4W fix is pretty attractive. Given the lower point buy of LEB (it's 22, right?) the argument for making suboptimal race/class combinations better is stronger than I think it was in L4W.

I don't like the feat (I think it's boring), I think everyone's going to take it eventually, and it's especially taxing to those classes who don't just use one weapon/implement. If this were just my game, I'd use the L4W fix (since that's what I did in RL before it came up there). So I guess I suggest we do the same here.

And I am in complete agreeance with the "L4W fix" for the expertise feats. By the end of any characters career they will have taken the feat, its a no brainer as its so powerful/useful... Which is because its fixing a problem. So I'm totally in favor of just giving them as free feats as outlined in the L4W discussion.

As for the Armor/Power mentioned by Vertexx69 I'm inclined to not want them included. The armor feels a lot like just a flavor thing. As already mentioned there are lots of ways to raise their AC. The power itself doesn't seem too bad. Ongoing damage seems odd for an at-will, but I dont think it is really unbalancing since fighters don't have many ways to make it harder to save against.

But more importantly I agree with Stonegod that something like that armor/power should be in a proposal seperate from this once we have our judges selected. Right now we need to hammer out the basics, and debating over 1 item and 1 power seems a lot like something we could postpone until things are up and on the go and we start accepting character/adventure submissions and have judges on hand to vote on proposals. For now I think the idea is to limit available material to published, hard cover, 1st party (WOTC) material.

 

[stonegod]

• The three core books: Player's Handbook, Dungeon Master's Guide, and Monster Manual (but not the PoL-centric Channel Divinity feats)
• Eberron Players Guide
• Forgotten Realms Players Guide (Races, Class, and Feats not tied to the setting)
• Players Handbook 2
• Monster Manual (For Monstrous Races)
• Arcane Power
• Martial Power
• Manual of The Planes
• Adventurers Vault

That is indeed the proposal (with the modifications to feats and such above). No PoL or FR tied items, either (holy symbols, mostly).

• Double Weapons and Oversized/Brutal weapons in Adventurer's vault (Discussion here.)
• Whether or not damage from the Dark Pact powers in FRPG should be voluntary or involuntary (Discussion here.)
• Whether or not to drop implement/weapon expertise feats from PHB 2 and just fix the broken math that they seem to be a patch for (Discussion here.)

• Oversized No one gets oversized save bugbears from the MM... and I think we should rule that they shouldn't. They'll have to live being the half-orc's poorer cousin.
• Double Weapons Double weapons can be cheesy, but are not really broken. They're broken if you don't read page 10 of the AV carefully. One side is primary, the other off hand so Tempests only get extra damage/etc. from that part, not both. And properties/powers only apply to the primary end (so it behooves me to have two actual weapons for that). As for rogues and the double-sword, that's still ambiguous (the oft-quoted Ask Wizards answer only answered the sneak attack part, nothing else such as SA+Heavy Blade Opprotunity). An easy nerf would be to just remove it; the other nerf would be just to saw one side is heavy, the other light and be done w/ it (so you can HBO, but not SA+HBO). There are several iconic double weapons in Eberron (a few in the EPG), so I do not recommend just removing them.
• Dark Pact Warlocks Darklocks make great warlocks tied to the Dragon Below. An agreement between players just plain courtesy, so I'm cool with that
• The Expertise Feats Every game I've been in not in RL seems to go this way and I'm not choosy about enough to say no.

Just my thoughts.

 

[elecgraystone]

I thought they removed the oversized racial feature in the errata, or at least on DDI?

In fact they have NOT. What they did is remove that ability from the dragon version of the minotaur. They did NOT remove it from the Monster Manual minotaur or bugbear. In fact the bugbear is STILL listed with that ability in the DDI.[ http://www.wizards.com/dndinsider/compendium/race.aspx?id=10 ]

So no errata, which leaves us with 2 official minotaurs and still 2 races with the ability. Basically, we'll have oversized around until the minotaur and the bugbear end up in a hardcover book. That's the only way that the old races will become unofficial [barring an errata, which doesn't seem likely].

 

[stonegod]

So no errata, which leaves us with 2 official minotaurs and still 2 races with the ability. Basically, we'll have oversized around until the minotaur and the bugbear end up in a hardcover book. That's the only way that the old races will become unofficial [barring an errata, which doesn't seem likely].

Which goes to my post above. As for two minotaurs, I'd go for the Dragon version (until the PH3 is out, that is).