Masters of the Wild: First Impressions

[Storm Raven]

What in the blue blazes is INSTANT RAGE?

given that rage is already a no time to activate thing... this one boggles.

best guess was allowing you to rage one after the other, delying the fatigue until after all were exhausted.

My guess is that it is a feat that allows you to rage in response to something. In the PHB it specifically states that a Barbarian cannot rage when it isn't his action, like if he is attacked or something. I'm guessing that Instant Rage allows a Barbarian the option of choosing to rage whenever he is damaged rather than waiting for his action.

 

[Klaus]

Just a quick note on the pre-reqs: Although only Fighter gets Weapon Specialization in the Core Books, there are plenty of other classes that grant Wpn Spec. in the classbooks. For instance, a Ranger with Weapon Focus (longsword) could become a Templar of Ehlonna and advance enough to gain Wpn Spec., then proceed to get levels in another Prestige Class (I know that most DMs don't allow a character taking levels in two PrClasses, but this is an example).

And no PrClass in S&F requires monk levels, only Unarmed Base Attack +x, Stunning Fist and Evasion class feature (for instance), which a Rogue, or a Fighter/Rogue could get...

 

[Zerovoid]

The information released a few weeks ago indicates they are not prerequisites for each other. However, this is not a problem because officially you cannot save feats. If you get a feat at 6th level you must spend it at 6th level. If you want to rule-0 that in your game that's fine but then it is you (or your DM) who is causing these the problem.

UofMDude

It just bothers me a whole lot that players should be punished for making good decisions at low levels. This means that characters started at a igher level than 1st have an inherent disadvantage.

Example:
A lot of people talk about taking toughness at first level to enhance the survivability of a character, especially wizards.

Say I make a human wizard, and my feat progression looks something like this:
1st level: Toughness, Spellcasting Prodigy
3rd level: Spell Focus
6th Level: Greater Spell Focus

Now, he dies, and I decide to make a virtually identical character.
1st level: Spell Focus, Spellcasting Prodigy
3rd level: Greater Spell Focus
6th level: Dwarf's Toughness

In the 2nd case, the new characer is strictly superior to the old. I think this is poor game design. Once the prerequisite as been met, which it will eventually be, the new feat is completely better than the old one. And now the feat's function is dependant on when it is taken, not on what the feat is. BTW, I finally got the feat list to load, so I realize that my example is bad becasue it requires +5 fort, but I think my basic argument still stands.

 

[UofMDude]

It just bothers me a whole lot that players should be punished for making good decisions at low levels. This means that characters started at a igher level than 1st have an inherent disadvantage.

This is true of many things in DnD though. I mean, look at the sorcerer. "Do I get dispel magic at 6th level or wait for greater dispel at 12th?" Well, if you wait until 12th you don't have it for 6 levels. But that isn't a problem if you make a character at 12th level.

I think this is one of the reasons why I (and most of the people I play with) feel more attached to characters they have played since level 1 (although in my campaign we started at level 3 because sneezes were killing too many of the level 1 characters in the past! ).

UofMDude

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

My quick 2 cents on a couple things:

1) I have no problem with PrC that require specific class abilities. In fact, I encourage it in some cases. IMHO there should be some PrC that only a certain class can achieve, specifically when you look to classes like the Monk, Druid or Paladin. Each of those classes has one or more weird abilities that could easily be focused into a full PrC that builds on that power. After all, many of the Arcane PrCs are class specific by default, with some requiring at least 5 levels as a wizard before you can take the class.

2) Depending on requirements, I might make the Toughness feat chain swappable, so that a 1st level character with Toughness could immediately swap out to say Dwarven Toughness when he qualifies for it. I'll have to wait to see the book, but I don't think it would unbalance things. Example:

1st level wizard 10 Con and Toughness= 7 hp

12th level wizard 10 Con and Dragon's Toughness= about 45-50 hp

Not too bad.

 

[Henry]

OK, since many questions have been answered already (and my gift copy of MotW is not coming until March 6th (Mother-****ing Amazon.com mother **********ers):

...Can someone tell us what the Oozemaster's special "hook" is? Can be have gelatinous companions? can he damage oozes with favored enemy and criticals? Can he surf black puddings into combat? What is his "thing?"

 

[Paladin]

2) Depending on requirements, I might make the Toughness feat chain swappable, so that a 1st level character with Toughness could immediately swap out to say Dwarven Toughness when he qualifies for it. I'll have to wait to see the book, but I don't think it would unbalance things. Example:

1st level wizard 10 Con and Toughness= 7 hp

12th level wizard 10 Con and Dragon's Toughness= about 45-50 hp

Not too bad.

The prerequisite is a base Fortitude save of +11. So, no straight-classed wizard character can ever hope to get this feat.

 

[Ulver]

Insight on release date

This was an experiment from Wizards on staggering the release dates.

Hobby Stores got the book today, Bookstores get the book on March 6th.

 

[Holy Bovine]

nevermind - I found page two

Me am smarter!!

 

[Crothian]

Do these require each other as prereqs? ie do I have to have toughness to take Dwarf's toughness etc.?

I can't wait til next payday!

I want it I want it I want it!!!

No, the only requirements are :
Dwarf Toughness: Fort +5
Giant Toughness: Fort +8
Dragon Toughness: Fort +11

On a slightly different note, the feats in MotW. Some have astericks by them, yet I can't find any key that says what the astericks are there for. Does anyone know?