Woo-hoo! Heroes of Horror preview!!

[M.L. Martin]

Sounds pretty cool. So she's immune to fear, herself, right?

Wrong.

Yes, the Dread Witch can be empowered by fear at the same time as suffering its effects. The excerpt says "if you fail your saving throw against the [fear] condition, you might not be in a position to use the bonuses, but you do have them".

Other fun effects she can use are delay fear, which she can use either on fear cast by or affecting her, and reflective fear--at 5th level, if she successfully saves against a fear effect, the source has to save or suffer the effect itself.


Matthew L. Martin

 

[Mouseferatu]

The other thing that does need to be addressed is the lack of a bonus on the save. If the paladin is no longer immune to fear, but doesn't get the bonus to fear saves that he gives to others, for instance.

That's a very good point, and one that I'm embarassed I didn't consider. I think it would be a very good houserule to say that a paladin (or similar character) who loses his immunity still receives the bonus he gives to others.

 

[Mouseferatu]

Wrong.

Yes, the Dread Witch can be empowered by fear at the same time as suffering its effects. The excerpt says "if you fail your saving throw against the [fear] condition, you might not be in a position to use the bonuses, but you do have them".

Other fun effects she can use are delay fear, which she can use either on fear cast by or affecting her, and reflective fear--at 5th level, if she successfully saves against a fear effect, the source has to save or suffer the effect itself.

Exactly. As the flavor text states, the dread witch doesn't learn to avoid fear, she learns to use it--both her own and others'. If she was immune, it wouldn't fit that concept, I think. The way it works now, she gains bonuses from the potential fear effect--but is only in a position to use those bonuses if she makes the save.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

Fear Witch

I like the concept of this class, and the implementation. I'm not sure I agree with the decision to make her fear spells overcome Immunity to Fear.

Are we now going to have a class whose fire spells can burn things immune to fire? Or an enchanter who can enchant things immune to mind-affecting spells?

I think this is a bad direction to take the game.

When a PC is immune to something, it's a big deal. It's not fun, in my opinion, to take this away from her.

It's said that a good adventure should take the PC's abilities into consideration, rather than negate them.

By the same token, I don't think this class should overcome the Paladin's immunity to fear.

I think it would have been cooler if, instead of the Witch's spells overcoming the Paladins immunity, they interacted with Fear-Immune creatures in an interesting way. Maybe the energy of the spell does negative energy damage equal to 1d6/spell level vs. an opponent that is Immune to Fear. I dunno, that's just the first example that came to mind.

Ken

 

[Vocenoctum]

When a PC is immune to something, it's a big deal. It's not fun, in my opinion, to take this away from her.

It's said that a good adventure should take the PC's abilities into consideration, rather than negate them.

By the same token, I don't think this class should overcome the Paladin's immunity to fear.

I think part of the problems are immunities themselves. "needs a +5 weapon to hit" was replaced with Damage Reduction. Perhaps Immunities are just too absolute.

If the paladin's ability was simply a +10, or +20, or triple charisma, or... whatever, it'd still serve the same purpose without making it impossible to get him scared once in a while.

 

[Mouseferatu]

As I said earlier, I'd agree that nixing immunities isn't appropriate in most circumstances, and I don't want to see it become a common/regular feature.

That said, I do believe there are times when it is appropriate. It offers challenges of the sort characters aren't accustomed to dealing with, and it makes particular opponents more frightening than they might otherwise be.

As a player, I'd certainly be upset if my paladin's fear immunity was nixed every time the topic came up. But for one or two foes out of a campaign, who are geared in that direction, I'd be okay with it.

But again, I don't really foresee it becoming common. I know that, at least on a personal level, I have no current plans for similar abilities on any of my current projects.

 

[Silveras]

As I said earlier, I'd agree that nixing immunities isn't appropriate in most circumstances, and I don't want to see it become a common/regular feature.

That said, I do believe there are times when it is appropriate. It offers challenges of the sort characters aren't accustomed to dealing with, and it makes particular opponents more frightening than they might otherwise be.

As a player, I'd certainly be upset if my paladin's fear immunity was nixed every time the topic came up. But for one or two foes out of a campaign, who are geared in that direction, I'd be okay with it.

But again, I don't really foresee it becoming common. I know that, at least on a personal level, I have no current plans for similar abilities on any of my current projects.

The other thing to keep in mind is that this seems quite appropriate genre-wise. While I agree that, in general, negating one of a class' strong points is a bad design idea, if that strong point would make the class a little too good in a specific genre, I think it is appropriate for that genre to have means of compensating.

In that sense, it is no more inappropriate than altering the class to suit the environment.

 

[BryonD]

The other thing to keep in mind is that this seems quite appropriate genre-wise. While I agree that, in general, negating one of a class' strong points is a bad design idea, if that strong point would make the class a little too good in a specific genre, I think it is appropriate for that genre to have means of compensating.

In that sense, it is no more inappropriate than altering the class to suit the environment.

All true so long as the player knows the nature of the changes going in to the game.

If you are going for a horror/fear genre, I still think it would be greatly preferable to just change the nature of the paladin's ability up front (say the big bonus mentioned above) rather than blindside a player with an exception to their reasonably expected absolute.

 

[VirgilCaine]

Wrong.

Yes, the Dread Witch can be empowered by fear at the same time as suffering its effects. The excerpt says "if you fail your saving throw against the [fear] condition, you might not be in a position to use the bonuses, but you do have them".

Other fun effects she can use are delay fear, which she can use either on fear cast by or affecting her, and reflective fear--at 5th level, if she successfully saves against a fear effect, the source has to save or suffer the effect itself.

Okay, that's just enough power to make it worth it to suffer fear effects. Cool.

 

[Silveras]

All true so long as the player knows the nature of the changes going in to the game.

If you are going for a horror/fear genre, I still think it would be greatly preferable to just change the nature of the paladin's ability up front (say the big bonus mentioned above) rather than blindside a player with an exception to their reasonably expected absolute.

I do not recall anyone mentioning blind-siding the players before.

However, I am of 2 minds on this. On the one hand, I generally publish all house and variant rules in a document I distribute to my players. Any books I draw from they are welcome to read (though I am reluctant to loan out my copies, as I may need them between sessions to prepare). I try to avoid any "oh, by the way" rules.

On the other hand, there is a legitimate argument for the DM having a need to occasionally surprise, even "blind-side", the PCs. This is especially true among more experienced gamers, who tend to be more familiar with the rules and who (sometimes) NEED shaking up. THAT, however, points to a need for the DM and Players to know each other, how each other is likely to react, and to have a working degree of trust that such changes are not "just to screw us over". NO rulebook can make the Player Characters safe when that trust is not there.