NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannager" data-source="post: 4768763" data-attributes="member: 73683">I'll list the errors that I spot, along with any design suggestions (balance issues, choices incongruous with 4th Edition design, etc.)Reactive Counterspell<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Minor quibble, but the trigger line would be clearer if it read "hit" instead of "struck".</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The power's effect needs to be clarified.  The phrase "his spell fails" is unclear; does this mean that the spell misses the character who used Reactive Counterspell, that it misses all targets, that it is considered expended but otherwise has no effect (including any effects that do not require a hit or miss), or some other resolution?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The power's special line needs to be clarified.  That it lasts "until the end of your next turn" implies that standard actions gained through other characters' powers, your own powers, or action points would be lost in addition to the normal standard action you receive each turn.  I suggest changing it to read something like "You spend your next standard action doing nothing," which is both clear and has design precedent in powers like Far Realm Phantasm (Warlock 7).</li> </ul>Curse of Flesh<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This power lacks the Implement keyword.  I assume this was unintentional, as this power is already borderline underpowered even without losing the ability to apply your magic implement's enhancement bonus to the attack roll.</li> </ul>Gabal's Superior Missile<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">As a general design rule, encounter attack powers do not significantly scale up as the character's level increases.  Instead, characters are urged to take higher-level attack powers when they reach the appropriate point.  I suggest adding, perhaps, a second, paragon-tier encounter attack power that represents a more advanced version of this spell.</li> </ul>Blessed by Dreams<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The wording of this feat is odd in that it allows you to reroll a saving throw for an ally if you so choose.  It is unclear if this reroll would receive any bonuses to saving throws you possess (as the feat causes you to make the reroll instead of the ally who made the original saving throw), or if it would use your ally's bonuses despite you rolling the die.  Furthermore, it is unclear if your ally would then be able to affect the saving throw with abilities that have a trigger of "You roll a saving throw" or similar.</li> </ul>Cavalry Errant<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"For the round" is not a clear duration mechanic in 4th Edition.  I suggest rewording it to "until the end of your next turn" or "until the end of your ally's next turn".</li> </ul>Initiate of the East Wind<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Unarmed strikes" are not used in 4th Edition.  I suggest rewording it to "unarmed attacks" instead.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Page 25 of the Player's Handbook states that "You can’t choose the Abyssal or Supernal languages as a 1st-level character."  I suggest making it clear that, if this feat is taken at 1st-level, you gain the ability to speak Supernal (but not to have your words universally understood) despite the normal restriction on this language.</li> </ul>Moral Insight<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The success line of Detect Presence of Good or Evil should read "Evil or Good power is detected within the burst's area."</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The duration on the stunned effect of an overwhelming aura should use a duration mechanic more clear than "one round."  I suggest changing the wording to "until the end of the character's next turn."</li> </ul>Spellduelist<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This feat is very powerful, to the point where it makes Spellduelist, Skill Training (Bluff) and Skill Focus (Bluff) must-have feats for nearly any Intelligence-based arcane character (especially Swordmages, melee Bards, and any other melee-based character with an Arcane multiclass)</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"In addition, you may negate an opportunity or immediate action against you," should be changed to read "In addition, you may negate an opportunity or immediate action triggered by you," in order to avoid clarity issues.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The Bluff check to negate an action should oppose the target's passive Perception score.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The phrase "combat encounter" is unnecessary.  "Encounter" should be fine.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This feat provides no way for resolving immediate and opportunity actions made by traps and hazards.  They lack Insight scores.  If this ability cannot be used against traps and hazards, that should be made clear in its text.</li> </ul>Spellduelist's Counterspell<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This power should receive the Arcane keyword.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The power's trigger is unclear.  It should be reworded to "You are targeted by a spell."</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It is unclear whether a successful negation of the attack using this power cancels the effects of the source of the attack completely, or merely for you.  As written, its effects are only negated for you; all other targets of the power remain affected.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Feats which unconditionally grant powers are generally to be avoided.  Instead of "You gain the counterspell feat power," I suggest rewording the feat's benefit to read "You can swap one 6th-level or higher utility power you know for the counterspell utility power."</li> </ul>Thieves' Guild Sympathizer<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Characters who are potentially surprised do not make Perception checks in the first place (unless they are specifically watching for an ambush, and are thus alert).  The surprising group makes a Stealth check (using the modifier of the creature with the lowest Stealth bonus) opposed by all other creatures' passive Perception scores.  Those whose passive Perception score they beat are surprised.  The text of this feat should be reworded to read "If you are not surprised at the start of an encounter, your allies may make an active Perception check to avoid being surprised," or something similar.</li> </ul>Vow of Healing<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This feat is not powerful enough to justify its drawback, in my opinion.  I realize that it probably exists primarily for flavor reasons, but assuming the party has a leader character, the administer first aid action is usually not required at all.</li> </ul>Whip Proficiency<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A body of feats for whip mastery have already been published in Dragon #368.  They are multiclass feats which build off the introductory feat Whip Training.  Whip Proficiency, as a non-multiclass feat, potentially has its own niche.  A character who wishes to focus on whip fighting, however, is probably better off taking Whip Training and its other associated feats.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The ability to grab a target with this feat is unclear.  Is the target grabbed because it is ensnared by the whip?  If so, it should be made clear that the character cannot attack with the whip while the target is grabbed.  Is the target pulled into an adjacent space, or is it grabbed in whichever square it was attacked in?  Can the wielder of the whip move up to 1 square away from the target while maintaining the grab?</li> </ul>Shining Warrior<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">"Until the end of the encounter," durations last until the character takes a rest or five minutes pass (Player's Handbook pg. 278).  As worded, this feat essentially reads "The intensified light lasts for 10 minutes or 5 minutes or until the character rests."  I suggest simply leaving it at "until the end of the encounter."</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This feat's special line needs to be removed.  Fighters do not receive bonus feats in 4th Edition.</li> </ul>Whip<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">A write-up for the whip has already been published in Dragon #368.  Though it is not referenced in the SRD, it creates something of a conflict for DMs making use of all available official material (especially since the WotBS version of the whip is a great deal more powerful than that printed in Dragon #368).</li> </ul>Shatterspell<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This item is very powerful.  The level 5 version costs practically nothing to a paragon- or epic-tier party and can end effects of any level.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Area burst 1 is a 3-square-by-3-square area.  This is incongruous with the text of the ability (in two different places it is implied that only a single square is affected by the item).</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The item's text should be reworded to read "All magic effects within the zone must make a saving throw or end immediately."</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The decision to have this item create a zone should be reexamined.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It is unclear who makes the saving throw for the magical effects disrupted by the item.  If the effect's caster makes the saving throw, does he apply applicable saving throw bonuses to the roll?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The item's effect is unclear.  Do magical effects which stretch into the item's attack area end entirely, even if their area would extend outside the area of the attack?  Do those effects return once the zone dissipates?</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The shatterspell's potion entry should grant resist 5 (or 10, 15, 20) against damage from spells, not +5 (or 10, 15, 20) damage resistance against spells.  The mechanic "damage resistance" is not used in 4th Edition.</li> </ul>Orb of Persistence<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This item is beyond powerful, arguably stronger than any implement published for 4th Edition to date.  It will kill solo monsters by itself.  It should, at a bare minimum, have its item level increased by 1 at each iteration.  I strongly suggest reexamining this item's daily power.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">This item's daily power should be reworded to read "One of your powers that has an effect that will end this turn can be sustained (Sustain Minor, until the end of your next turn) for a number of rounds equal to your INT bonus (minimum 1).</li> </ul>Feigning Fez<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">I'm having a hard time seeing how this item is functionally any different from a Hat of Disguise.</li> </ul>Feather Token<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The whip entry is unclear.  The created whip is described as a +1 whip but whether or not the whip gains the critical property of a +1 weapon on its own attacks should be clarified.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The whip entry has AC and Fortitude defense values for the created whip, but lacks hit points (and, perhaps, resistance).</li> </ul>Arcane Servant<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">It is unclear who makes the saving throw if the focus is dropped.  If the ritual's caster makes the saving throw, does he apply any bonuses or penalties he may have to the roll?</li> </ul>Duelist's Etiquette<ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The nonlethal damage mechanic does not exist in 4th Edition.  When a creature is reduced to 0 hit points, the creature responsible for the final attack chooses whether the target is knocked out or killed.  I suggest rewording the ritual to make it clear that characters reduced to 0 hit points by spells or spell effects (which covers conjurations and summonings) within the ritual's area are automatically knocked out.</li> </ul>That's what I was able to track down on a careful pass through the booklet.  Again, a number of the points I made above are simply suggestions, but they are made in an effort to make the new material less incongruous with existing material.</blockquote>

Verification