Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kobold Stew" data-source="post: 8699529" data-attributes="member: 23484"><p>Rune Carving Feats.</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">So we saw a version of these feats already. One way to measure them is in the changes that have been introduced.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Rune carver apprentice has added a first-level spell, Comprehend languages. Can be useful in the game; is absolutely the first-level spell that would change my real life most, and so it's a good get, from my perspective. It still doesn't counteract the huge reduction in power from the previous version, though.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Options for Rune Carver apprentice are significantly reduced, from 19 first-level spells to 8. The reduction is probably sensible. Significantly, three of the 8 weren't on the previous list: disguise self, speak with animals, and entangle. Entangle is an amazing spell, and I'm pleased to see it added, though its connection with "Mountain" is pretty weak (though Jump was no better). Similarly, I'm not sure "Friend" is more closely associated with Speak with Animals than Bless, but maybe Snow White will be happy. Of the ones that are gone, I would miss the option of taking Cure Wounds, Fog Cloud, Shield, and Feather Fall.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The biggest change is that instead of being able to carve a rune of choice, you're now proficient in <s>one </s>EDIT: Only two  runes ("I can draw a dragon, but not a mountain"). Yes, you can change one rune you know each level, but sheesh -- what a hugely underpowered concept: you know how to write one rune at a time. I would have thought a reduced list and the ability to choose would be much more fun for the player. Is this too complicated? Not by the standards being set out here. How do I know? Look at the next feat in the chain.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Rune Carver Adept, only at 4th level, previously let you carve more than one rune per long rest. I actually think that the previous Rune Carver Adept and Rune Carver Apprentice would have been an acceptable single feat. This is s huge investment for a "free" one-level spell slot with limited choice; with much less use than magic adept. It's really unclear what they are thinking with this feat now.  Now it's a half-feat, with a free floating +1.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">In addition to that, you get an additional effect, of (a) free advantage for an ally nearby, (b) THP for an ally nearby, or (c) no opportunity attacks vs an ally nearby. All of these are potentially useful, and are a nice trick to trot out. I like that they all help someone else -- on that level, they're good design, because they encourage team play. Everybody wants to have someone else be a runecarver now. Nice. Or so we might think....</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">What triggers this? Here's where it gets terrible. The cool benefit gets triggered (a) when you cast any of the 8 spells listed on the foundation feat, or (b) when you cast a spell of the same school of magic as the particular rune you have inscribed. All of these require keeping track of so much.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">(a) makes it clear why the "good" spells were removed: since one might want to cast Fog Cloud, Cure Wounds, or Shield, the removal of them from the potential list of runes is a way of nerfing the second feat down to a half-feat. Ugh. It's deliberately trying to make the base feat less attractive, so that the second feat in the chain isn't overpowered (or is still a half-feat?). Speak with Animals is even less desirable now, since the in-combat benefit is unlikely ever to be triggered.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">(b) is worse. If you case any spell within the same school as the school of the rune you have memorized... ugh. Okay, so the specialist rune-carver benefits a spellcaster more than a non-spellcaster. The idea of a dwarf fighter who knows rune magic, or a half-orc rogue who has learned an arcane secret, is always going to lag behind a wizard. That's disappointing (even recognizing that there are fewer spellcaster-focused feats than there could be). Let's look at the schools:<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Ray of sickness -- Necromancy</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Chromatic Orb -- Evocation</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Disguise Self -- Illusion (unlikely to be used in combat, negating most of the benefits anyway)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Speak with animals -- Divination (unlikely to be used in combat, negating most of the benefits anyway)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Longstrider -- Transmutation</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Command -- Enchantment</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Entangle -- Conjuration</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Sanctuary -- Abjuration</li> </ul></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Okay: so there is one option from each of eight schools. That should be explicit. The spell/rune chosen is tied directly to one school, which is going to benefit other spells cast from that school. A full caster with access to a wide range of schools can therefore do much more with this feat than a non-caster, and a school specialist (like many wizards) perhaps get the greatest benefit.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">While I appreciate trying to make the schools more meaningful, the story behind the feat and its implementation are too much at odds. The second feat in the chain is a half feat that disproportionately benefits full casters. That should be explicit: it's not about rune carving at all in the end, it's about enhancing the spells cast from a particular school.</li> </ul></blockquote><p></p>

Verification