Playtest: Primal Power

[bert1000]

Well, as pointed out, the instinctive reaction replaces OA's for the Druid's summoned creatures, and I think for flavor reasons, instinctive actions will be unique to creatures summoned by Primal powers, which appear to be primarily natural creatures.

I *like* the fact that there are going to be several classes with summoning powers, but they'll still have just a tad of mechanical distinction.

Well, I like classes to have dominant traits but not a huge fan of many exclusive traits. Oh well, it goes into the DM tool kit anyway...

 

[Nymrohd]

Tribal feats seem very decent for world building at least fluffwise. They do not need to be for tribes after all; a dwarven clan or an eladrin house could also grant some specific tribal feat.

 

[Logan_Bonner]

They mentioned that "Arcane Power" introduced summoning. Mistake? As far as I understand the Invoker in PHB2 really is the introduction of that. Or perhaps they're simply suggesting that Arcane Power is the first place that summoning is added to an existing class much like they're doing with the druid?

PH2 and Arcane Power were being designed at the same time. I think the summoning powers were added to PH2 after the system had already been designed for Arcane Power. So that might have caused some confusion. Either way, it will be nice to have those rules in a PH instead of just in a supplement.

 

[Hawke]

PH2 and Arcane Power were being designed at the same time. I think the summoning powers were added to PH2 after the system had already been designed for Arcane Power. So that might have caused some confusion. Either way, it will be nice to have those rules in a PH instead of just in a supplement.

Makes sense, thanks for the reply!

 

[Scribble]

I'm not a huge fan of the tribal feats -- persuading Ed to take a feat because Bill also took that feat is a little...limiting, I guess, in my eyes. But it's harmless and it's good for those who want it, so other than personal preference, there's no hate for 'em.

I am very happy to seem summoning making a return to the game.

I think they're a pretty cool idea myself. You still get a bonus even if Ed doesn't take it, but it also provides a little incentive for Ed to also take it. I talso reinforces the idea that the PCs are a team, and need to work together to survive, as well as adding a new incentive to kind of work togethr on a backstory other then "we met at a bar and decided to kill stuff and collect loot."

 

[Rechan]

I don't mind the tribal feats.

They're also not a new idea. Feats from 3e had those. Usually it was something like Expert Flanker; if you're flanking with someone who also has this feat, you get a +4 to attack instead of +2.

 

[I'm A Banana]

You still get a bonus even if Ed doesn't take it, but it also provides a little incentive for Ed to also take it. I talso reinforces the idea that the PCs are a team, and need to work together to survive, as well as adding a new incentive to kind of work togethr on a backstory other then "we met at a bar and decided to kill stuff and collect loot."

You're right, but I look at it more from a "maximizing potential" angle. You only get the maximum bonus out of the feat if your entire party takes it. Versus getting the maximum potential out of Improved Initiative, it just depends on me taking it.

There's also the "I don't want to tell Bill what he should do with his character" thing. And, correlated, "I don't want Bill to tell me what I should do with my character" thing. The feats step on that little social nicety of D&D. This does make you feel more like a team, but I'm not choosing my feats so Bill can have more fun.

Again, not to my tastes, but I see how they're good for others. They do what they do well, even if I would never want to do what they help me do.

 

[Akaiku]

I like it. Well, cept the lv 29 wolf summon that has that instinctive action to attack vs will in burst 2 and daze. Has a nasty tendency of frying your party like that.

But with the tribal feats? The way I look at it is thusly: "Oh, +1 to oa's attack and damage? Nice, plus I'm a shaman and it fits well." Call up the fighter's player, "Hey, would you spend a feat for a +2 to attack and damage for oa's? Sure? Cool!" Call the warlord with a spear's player, "Soo.... +3 to oa's attack and damage... Worth a feat? Mabey? Well, it would also give it to me and the fighter..." Then finally the invoker, "Would you take a feat to give the rest of the party +4 to oa's damage and attack? You'd get it as well, though you probably wouldn't use it...."

 

[Nymrohd]

Quite a few of the druid summons have instinctive actions that are potentially dangerous to your party to be honest (though the Wolf is probably the worst offender). Otherwise these powers would be seriously overpowered. Some of them already are so. Summon a razorclaw behemoth on a fight with Large+ monsters and for one standard action you get a lot of additional damage every single round without doing anything. ANd that is an epic power. The thunderhawk gives you free CA against one enemy for everyone for one standard action The toad can be set upon a hard enemy and afterwards it will keep attacking. Instinctive actions are potentially OP as written.

 

[Rechan]

Quite a few of the druid summons have instinctive actions that are potentially dangerous to your party to be honest (though the Wolf is probably the worst offender). Otherwise these powers would be seriously overpowered. Some of them already are so. Summon a razorclaw behemoth on a fight with Large+ monsters and for one standard action you get a lot of additional damage every single round without doing anything. ANd that is an epic power. The thunderhawk gives you free CA against one enemy for everyone for one standard action The toad can be set upon a hard enemy and afterwards it will keep attacking. Instinctive actions are potentially OP as written.

Are you going to submit that as feedback?