Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5936250" data-attributes="member: 42582">Great thread, good catches.Yes. The GM deciding whether a given action requires a DEX check or a STR check = good empowerment. The GM deciding whether or not the wall is so slippery that it causes disadvantage on a climb attempt = good empowerment. The GM having to decide whether Reaper does or doesn't interact in a certain way with thrown weapons = bad rules. The GM should be adjudicating situations, not having to fiat the outcomes of action resolution.I would write the feat along the following lines: that all your attacks hit and deal damage, but only if your attack roll is successful do you get to roll any damage die and add non-stat bonuses; otherwise your damage is just your stat mod bonus.Then two qualifications are needed: if the attack would otherwise deal damage on an unsuccessful attack roll, Reaper has no effect (like Hammer Rhythm in 4e); and if the attack would not let you add your stat mod bonus to damage, Reaper has no efffect.These changes are fairly intuitive (I know my wording is crappy, but it could be rewritten for clarity along the lines of some of the similar 4e abilities). And I think that they deal with all your issues: issue 1 (because of the way non-lethal and lethal attacks are handled in the playtest, along 4e lines), issue 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 (because none of these adds stat mod to damage, or even does damage in the case of 2, 3 and 4), issue 5 (because the Crusader's Strike bonus would be one of those that applies only on a successful attack roll), issue 8 (because when a torch is used to deal [fire] damage the stat mod would not be added as a bonus) and issue 9 (because Arc Lightning already has a miss effect).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5936250, member: 42582"] Great thread, good catches. Yes. The GM deciding whether a given action requires a DEX check or a STR check = good empowerment. The GM deciding whether or not the wall is so slippery that it causes disadvantage on a climb attempt = good empowerment. The GM having to decide whether Reaper does or doesn't interact in a certain way with thrown weapons = bad rules. The GM should be adjudicating situations, not having to fiat the outcomes of action resolution. I would write the feat along the following lines: that all your attacks hit and deal damage, but only if your attack roll is successful do you get to roll any damage die and add non-stat bonuses; otherwise your damage is just your stat mod bonus. Then two qualifications are needed: if the attack would otherwise deal damage on an unsuccessful attack roll, Reaper has no effect (like Hammer Rhythm in 4e); and if the attack would not let you add your stat mod bonus to damage, Reaper has no efffect. These changes are fairly intuitive (I know my wording is crappy, but it could be rewritten for clarity along the lines of some of the similar 4e abilities). And I think that they deal with all your issues: issue 1 (because of the way non-lethal and lethal attacks are handled in the playtest, along 4e lines), issue 2, 3, 4, 6 and 7 (because none of these adds stat mod to damage, or even does damage in the case of 2, 3 and 4), issue 5 (because the Crusader's Strike bonus would be one of those that applies only on a successful attack roll), issue 8 (because when a torch is used to deal [fire] damage the stat mod would not be added as a bonus) and issue 9 (because Arc Lightning already has a miss effect). [/QUOTE]

Verification