Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- individual adventure modules! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed to plug in to your game.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Coredump" data-source="post: 916936" data-attributes="member: 6939">Hey, having fun with the exchanges....krap krap krap krap  *KRAP*Sorry, but I was going along just fine during a very nice long thought out post, when I realized a basic flaw in my scenario building.  When you gave the damage averages I read and understood them, and then immediately got my wires crossed. I kept thinking that the rogue got 23.5 when using SA, and the UG got 18.5 when using PS; but really the UG needed PS **AND** SA. So many of the 'advantages' I was writing about for the UG was based around not needing to meet the SA conditions. So now I get to rewrite most of this.....  Like I said... krap. I agree, but it seems like grasping at straws here. This fact hasn't stopped tons of archers from playing, so there has to be some benefit to not having to be in melee range. (after changes... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":-)" title="Smile    :-)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":-)" />Well, either class can use range, and either can use melee. (Is precise shot only for ranged? If that is the case, I will switch and say it is more pain than benefit) When SA is not available (not flanked, etc) The UG will do more damage; but not a 'lot' more, so I don't know how important this is. Okay, this is where I wrote a whole bunch of stuff, that is now gone. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />But, if PS is only for ranged, than you kinda screw the UG. SA hardish to use at range, PS not in melee. hmmmm....OTOH, I really don't think EITHER of these really fits the character concept. Why, oh WHY do must we assume that a lucky gambler is the worlds best dagger weilder? Not quite, I think it is *unnecessarily* narrow. What is the logic that forces this limitation? And why is it that a Master Gambler is required to be a Dagger Master also? I just dont see how it fits. Even leaving it open for any weapon, I don't see how it fits. This is Maverick, not Zorro. (Hell Mat used a polearm)Oh, I think Dagger would be a good, and versatile choice, just don't see why it should be the only choice. Nor why a UG should have to be overly adept at any one weapon, he is a gambler, not a duelist. I should have edited your quote better, I was not saying that I thought a UG would have 2wf. You mentioned a situation where SA and PS would not work, saying that the Rogue would have the advantage from having a better weapon. I simply stated that the UG has access to those same weapons, without losing any further advantages. As for 2wf, it takes several feats, so it is debatable how much of an advantage it would be. Plus, remember, that you brought this up in regards to *uncrittable* encounters, a not so common occurence.Okay, here are my gripes in a nutshell.1. It is forcing a Master Gambler, based on being uncommonly lucky, to also be a weapon master.2. It is unnecassarily narrowing the weapon selection down to just Dagger or Dart.3. There is no 'combat advantage' built around his 'luck'.4. It is waaayy too easy to break the game via gambling. (unless I am just really missing the mechanic involved.)Yes, Concealed Weapon was meant to be more flair and flavor rather than a major advantage. But I do really think it could have some benefits; but we can go into those later.Neither of you commented on my suggestion of increasing the threat range. (It is added to the final, so it is not multiplied by other feats, etc.) That would give a combat advantage, not limit the weapon choice, not require him to be a weapon master, and would still build on his previous class.Assuming a rogue is using a rapier, and by 6th level has a +2 rapier, but now becomes a UG, and has to 'give it up' in order to benefit from PS. Hmmm....BUt there are also other ways to gain a combat advantage, while still using the 'lucky' mechanic.Once per level, per day; the UG can 'feel lucky'; this allows him to roll 2 dice at the same time, and choose which to take.orOnce every other level, he gets one die he can use once a day as above. (roll simultaneously, take choice) But he can use as many dice as he has still available. (ie, at 8th lvl UG, he has 4 dice, he could add one die to four separate rolls, or add all 4 to one roll, etc. But once used, they are not available until the next day.) This allows for a bit more 'extraordinary' luck to shine through.orFoes have a X% chance to miss on their first shot. (man, I thought he had you, you sure got lucky)orAdd CHA bonus to ACor Everytime you miss, it gives a cumulative +1 (max of UG lvl) until you succeed. (You can't be unlucky for long.)orAny first hit that would place you at/below 0 HP puts you at 1 instead. (Or give a X% chance) (You were dead meat, lucky thing you slipped right then.)orCalled shots are only -3or X times per day, can use called shot with no penalty (how the hell did you hit his eye; man was that a lucky shot)oretc.etc.All of these will give a combat advantage without forcing the UG to become some inconsistent Weapon Master; and play along with the "boy are you lucky" aspect.In addition, they can work with the previous class build; unlike having to switch to being a Dagger Master.Also, I restate my position that the ability to make that much money, that easily, can really mess with the game. And I think this might be the problem, this is a gambler, not a duelist. Why force a lucky gambler to be a specialized duelist? Mat, Maverick, Doc; none of which used daggers. (granted, two had guns, but still. Hell, Maverick was a LOUSY shot, no combat skills to speak of.I think I got too bogged down in the PS vs SA issue, especially since I think both are poor choices for this class.Hope you enjoy..</blockquote>

Verification