Questions about/Problems with PHB II

[TheGogmagog]

The idea behind those alternate fighter abilities seems weird to me. Why not just make them feats? Then a player can decide to choose them as a feat or not. Actually, isn't that what they are doing anyway? What's the difference between making them alternate abilities that burns a feat, rather than making them feats which also burns a feat?

I've long thought fighters needed exclusive feats, just like the rogue special abilities after level 10. The one that comes to my mind is one that lets fighters only over level 10 to take a feat that would allow them to roll on a critical hit table in exchange for x1 damage, or only on natural 20. I'm not a fan of critical hit tables as a house rule, but I like the idea of a career figher, player or BBEG, being able to do something unique.

 

[Kurotowa]

Interesting. You can't use Combat Expertise with any of those options, either.

*Re-checks the wording of CE*

Huh. You're right. Technically you couldn't even use CE with Whirlwind Attack. I can see why it was worded the way it was, to avoid people retreating and chugging a potion while using CE, since the intent is to be fighting cautiously.

This is one of those cases where I'd discuss a house rule with the group. IMO it doesn't break the spirit or the balance of the feat to allow CE to be allowed with any attack, as long as you do make an attack of some sort. But that's a house rule and neither here nor there.

 

[ThirdWizard]

And if they do that, they are really class abilities in feat clothing, so its better IMO to call them that.

As class abilities (actually substitution abilities) you either take them at the level they are available or not at all. If they were feats, you could hold off on aquiring them and still grab the feat later. So, there is a mechanical difference.

 

[Hypersmurf]

*Re-checks the wording of CE*

Huh. You're right. Technically you couldn't even use CE with Whirlwind Attack.

Certainly you can. With Whirlwind Attack, you're taking the full attack action, and giving up your regular attacks in exchange for the Whirlwind. If it says "As a full round action, you can...", CE would not work. But it says "When yo use the full attack action...", which is all CE needs.

-Hyp.

 

[Kurotowa]

Certainly you can. With Whirlwind Attack, you're taking the full attack action, and giving up your regular attacks in exchange for the Whirlwind. If it says "As a full round action, you can...", CE would not work. But it says "When yo use the full attack action...", which is all CE needs.

Can you tell this the point where my grasp of the fiddly bits of the rules goes a touch fuzzy? Too many special cases to keep track of.

Still, it's interesting how they phrased those new feats, specifically to be incompatable with just about everything else.

 

[frankthedm]

It's a shame that those replacement abilities (at least one of which is specifically defensively oriented) can't be combined with Combat Expertise.

That is a intentional, the CA defense is very strong, allowing even more abilities in combination with CA would be too good. The new feats are there for more options, not combo-ing with CA for extreme AC or an ultra defense.

 

[Marshall]

That is a intentional, the CA defense is very strong,

Huh!?!? You're concept of 'very strong' is a little wonky. +2 AC/lost iterative is piddly.

 

[Particle_Man]

Never mind. I shoudl read the hwole thread before replying to part of it.

 

[Glyfair]

I think that's the difference between fantasy fiction, where the author isn't constrained by balance issues, and an RPG.

Look at Wheel of Time. Rand 'al Thor is a....what, 20 year old kid, who is a better fighter than all the fighters in the land, and a better channeler than the rest as well.

Particularly in your 4-man party of D&D adventurers, you can't simulate that very well, because that would mean either one character is way more powerful than the other PCs, or he's not as powerful as he's supposed to be according to the fiction.

I think that's not so much a RPG vs. novel issue. I think it's just more about the quirks of D&D, specifically.

Some RPGs work with unbalanced parties much better than others. D&D is one of the worst with handling wide variation in party balance (specifically, high level & low level characters in the same party). A 3rd level character in a party with 10th level characters doesn't have a high life expectancy in normal "adventuring" situations.

I think the real key to this is the durability of characters. In RPGs where the amount of damage a character can take doesn't increase much it's much more feasible. The big problem with D&D is that a single high level fireball can out right kill low level characters while just inconviencing mid-level characters. In something like Runequest, characters mostly indirectly increase their survivability so that difference, while still there, aren't that dramatic.

 

[Plane Sailing]

What's with the short duration spells lately? Between Tome of Magic and now this, WotC seems to be creating lots of spells with 1 round or 5 round durations, etc. The Duskblade, with respect to what magic he can command, seems completely inferior to a character who is something like a Fighter5/Wizard5/Eldritch Knight 10. His buffs are weaker, he doesn't have much in the way of blasting spells, and his protections aren't great either.

Is it just me, or is something a little "off" with those two classes?

The short duration spells have swift casting times, which are excellent for duskblades who want to cast while fighting and not wait until they can quicken spells!

One of the duskblade features that you may have missed is the high level ability to cast a touch spell and deliver it with their weapon... and if they get iterative attacks the touch spell comes off on each of the iterative attacks! That can rack up some quite serious blasting