Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jaldaen" data-source="post: 4319252" data-attributes="member: 214">Right... but I am also concerned with the zones created by an Area attack. If you can omit a particular target from an Area burst, then the question of what happens to the zone effect in that square needs to be asked.I agree keywords add flexibility, but the problem I see is that the "Area burst [#] within [#] squares" is something that cannot be redesigned, which means there is no difference between how one would express the power when using projectile or thrown weapons. Sure you could add a requirment for certain long range powers, but then you have to start designing thrown weapon/projectile weapon only powers and adding "Requirments" to powers. If the expression of Area burst was not defined in this way it might work. In addition, the volley keyword would have to be just as long as the volley attack entry because it would have to explain how weapons work with the Area burst.Actually keywords are add-ons to powers and mechanical ones do add an extra, exceptions-based step to the power reading process, especially when we are talking about an exception-based attack type that will be in almost every one of the class' powers.I just think its much cleaner design-wise to not confuse the issue with Volley keyword and "Area burst..." attack when I can just have "Ranged volley..." and be done with it. Or WotC choose to KIS for the Core Books and not add a Ranged weapon AoE attack because they didn't need one since there were no martial controllers and thus no need for a Ranged AoE.The thing is that as a 4e supplement anyone who has access to the class will also have access to its new keywords and new attack type definitions.Actually I did not see in the classes where specific keywords other than Implement are explained. Healing Lore for clerics mentions the "Healing" keyword, but only in order to explain adding your Wisdom mod. It does not define Healing or Radiant at all.Actually as I just mentioned above other than Implements the other keywords are defined outside of each class (at the beginning of the class chapter). Since the Harrier class would be self contained and include all the necessary keywords and attack types it shouldn't be a problem. In addition, no matter if its a keyword or an attack type both will require reference outside the PHB so that is a wash for me.However, I'm not getting rid of an established step. I'm creating an alternate step for Ranged attacks to take.I think I said that <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Actually as a "Ranged" volley it would provoke OAs by the mere fact that it uses Ranged at the beginning because that is what OAs key off of, not what follows.That's one of the reasons why I have close burst powers mixed into the Harrier as is and in addition I have the close quarters zontrol zone to help out with enemies who get too close.In addition, it would be odd to have a power that can switch between Area burst and close burst because one provokes OAs and the other doesn't. You might want flexibility but if the powers are too flexibile then they become auto-picks for multiclassing. Unless you just meant powers in general falling into the two categories... in that case I agree having both OA proking and non-provoking powers available is a must for a controller.Actually I could already do that without worrying about Area bursts... they are not married concepts <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I think you're right on this point, but my only concern is 1) not redefining 4e References (which means the Area burst would have to read: Area burst [#] within [#] squares; 2) ease of use. The first one is a major negative in the Area burst column because how doe you work in weapon range to that equation. I suppose you could do the following:Area burst [1,2, or 3] within # squaresWith the Volley keyword saying something to the effect of: When reading "within # squares" insert the maximum range of the weapon you are using to create the Area burst as the "#."However, that seems odd and clunky compared to saying:Ranged volley [1,2, or 3] within weapon rangeThe only real problem with "volley" is it might be a term that is later defined by WotC as a 4e reference, however since this would probably be a pdf product I could always change it when that happens and it'll be consistent for anyone purchasing the product.</blockquote>

Verification