May Rules Update

[keterys]

I like this method - it makes more sense to me than the updated version.

And it can make quite a difference in games such as LFR, where there may be anything up to a 4-level spread between the PCs in a single game (though, of course, that's also where houserules like this can't be applied).

Maximum spread of 3 levels in LFR (ex: 11th -> 14th) and that means it'll never make a difference of more than _1_ to the DC. Simplification outweighs that pretty easily.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

Hopefully this will get changed in next update... could really be an oversight...

i was befuddelt by creature and target anyway...

 

[Kwalish Kid]

also if you read carefully you need a throwing weapon and a melee weapon now. This is preventing a misuse of a farbond fullblade which i really approve.

It always had this requirement. But it does not say that one needs two weapons. A farbond spellblade is both a thrown weapon and a melee weapon, so it meets the requirements.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

depends how you read it...

a throwing weapon and a melee weapon are two weapons...

otherwise it is rather redundant, as throwing weapons are usually melee...

 

[sigfile]

Cure light wounds says you regain hit points as though you spent a healing surge.

Had you spent a healing surge, healer's lore would apply.

So, you can make an argument (probably technically incorrect, but pretty close, and pretty reasonable) that Healer's Lore applies to CLW.

Not the case, unfortunately.

May 4, 2010 -- 1:18PM, WotC_GregB wrote:You don't gain the bonus to healing in powers that say "as if you had spent a healing surge."

 

[DracoSuave]

Not the case, unfortunately.

So, let's get this straight.


It's now the rule that

You may do THINGA as tho you did THINGB

Means that you no longer get to treat it as tho you did THINGB?


This ruling does not compute.

Cure Light Wounds does not say 'Heals their surge value.' It says 'regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge.'

Which, if Greg's ruling is correct, means that if it had spent a healing surge, it'd get a different number than this ability gives you, which means that the power does NOT actually do what it says it does... so you don't regain hit points as if...


....in other words. The rules break. The new feature has to actually say 'Powers that do not actually spend the healing surge are not affected by this feature' in order for it not to work.


In otherwords, your errata is bad if someone has to clarify it with additional rules text the DAY it comes out.

Also, fail for no errata on Mindlink Surge.

 

[kerbarian]

So, let's get this straight.


It's now the rule that

You may do THINGA as tho you did THINGB

Means that you no longer get to treat it as tho you did THINGB?


This ruling does not compute.

Cure Light Wounds does not say 'Heals their surge value.' It says 'regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge.'

Which, if Greg's ruling is correct, means that if it had spent a healing surge, it'd get a different number than this ability gives you, which means that the power does NOT actually do what it says it does... so you don't regain hit points as if...


....in other words. The rules break.

If you look at it as only "regains hit points as if it had spent a healing surge" instead of "regains hit points as if it had been healed by a cleric while spending a healing surge", it makes sense. The target heals its surge value (plus any surge bonuses like dragonborn Con), and then the cleric piles some extra healing on top of that. When determining the extra cleric healing, you check whether the target spent a surge, and in the case of CLW, it didn't.

It's not necessarily how I would have ruled it, but I don't think it creates a paradox.

 

[Incendax]

First of all: I cannot believe they did not issue errata for Harmonious Thunder! How could they overlook the craziness of this power? Should I take this to mean that the power is working exactly as intended?

Second of all: Nothing in the May errata about the Battlemind, so it looks like DracoSuave gets to keep his Avatar!

 

[sigfile]

I assume you meant to suggest that my DM and I could jointly decide to ignore that part of the errata. As our DM has a policy of NOT ignoring errata, that's not an option.

Incidentally, though it's great for sorcerers, it's also very expensive for them. Most sorcerers will probably put 10s in Int and Wis, so a 13 in each uses up 6 points.

Note: I'm not arguing with the change. I'm not sure why WotC decided it was necessary -- it's certainly not one of the issues that has generated lots of complaints -- but I believe the most important part of setting out rules for a game is that it sets out default points of agreement. If you start by assuming that you are all going to play by the official rules, you avoid an awful lot of wrangling.

Well... sorcerers.

Swordmages could take a significant feat investment to make a unique at-will absolutely huge. And do relatively little damage with it. Feat support helps make it a VERY useful spell, but you'd never demolish anything short of a minion horde with it at maximum pimpage (barring thunderglaive silliness).

Sorcerers could swing a similar feat investment (if slightly harder due to stat requirements, but manageable by epic) and have an at-will area burst 2 cold-radiant zone that capitalizes on both radiant vulnerability AND frostcheese that inflicts extra cold and fire damage when an enemy exits the zone. Or it could be an extra-large area burst 3, inflicting radiant-thunder and fire-thunder damage, receiving the bonus of any of the thunder enhancing feats. With a sorcerer's damage base -2. God forbid anything in that zone attack the sorcerer in response...

Wash, rinse, repeat with similar results for Burning Spray. And that's just the at-wills. And I only dabble in strikers, so I'm probably missing some additional horrible that makes this all the worse.

I *do* play a swordmage, and I am sad to see this combo go. Given that it was a wizard's feat, though, I'm not surprised to see it limited to wizards-only.

 

[sigfile]

First of all: I cannot believe they did not issue errata for Harmonious Thunder! How could they overlook the craziness of this power? Should I take this to mean that the power is working exactly as intended?

Second of all: Nothing in the May errata about the Battlemind, so it looks like DracoSuave gets to keep his Avatar!

Check out what else is notably absent from this round of updates.

I expect the PHB3 stuff to occupy a significant portion of the NEXT update.