Mythic Preview—Path Abilities

Like Sean said, there's not just one flavor of hero out there - there are countless, and I really like the idea of being able to cherry-pick these powers in order to truly customize your hero :)

A wise person once said "If you don't like these options, then they weren't written for you."

So, correct me if I'm wrong here, but can you do this with abundant healing:

Train 10 (or more!) squirrels to follow you around. Cast mass cure light wounds. If you have the healing domain, each one is probably getting healed for 25, for a total of 250hp over their maximum (you are keeping your squirrels healthy, right?). Then transfer this to your nearest ally.

It also lets you get more bang for your buck with channel energies.

So, correct me if I'm wrong here, but can you do this with abundant healing:

Train 10 (or more!) squirrels to follow you around. Cast mass cure light wounds. If you have the healing domain, each one is probably getting healed for 25, for a total of 250hp over their maximum (you are keeping your squirrels healthy, right?). Then transfer this to your nearest ally.

It also lets you get more bang for your buck with channel energies.

lol don't ruin it and loop whole it before the book is out.

So, correct me if I'm wrong here, but can you do this with abundant healing:

It says 'target', not 'targets'. I would rule that only the overflow from one creature can be transferred to others.

I missed the fact that rage can't be stolen, but that's really accidental. There are so many other abilities that make no sense when you steal them - why does it make sense to steal a ranger's Wild Track ability, but not her perception skill? in game, how are those two all that different? And why would you be able to steal s Dragon's Disciple inherent bonus to strength? it's not an "ability", it's an inherited power. Stealing it is akin to stealing someone's eye color. Or a barbarian's DR (whcih really comes to show that the barbarian is a TOUGH guy).
And why will the power only work against creatures with classes? Why can you steal a ranger's favored enemy, but you can't steal a wolves' trip?

Once you start referencing out-of-game terms with in-game powers, it gets messy. The game is inherently a simulation that, when held to close inspection, doesn't make perfect sense. Attempting to force those out of game approximations of reality into supposedly in game powers, you draw attention to that lack of logic instead of making it as unimportant as possible.

Note the "Su" descriptor and suddenly everything makes much more sense.

I don't see how "stealing" (more like borrowing, really, since it's a willing target. Or COPYING, since they don't LOSE it. Name needs some work.) a Barbarian's Rage (though you can't actually do that) is any more far fetched than somebody casting the Rage spell.

Or how stealing a Ranger's Track is any different from casting Pattern Recognition (though that actually DOES give a bonus to Perception, but Perceptions and Survival are not necessarily linked).

Or anything else really. I could probably do this all day. The only ability I can think of off the top of my head that a spell or magic item doesn't steal is Sneak Attack (well actually, I think there's an item that gives 2d6 Sneak Attack too...), so why is it an issue that a Supernatural ability of a Mythic (i.e. Legendary, beyond human, near Demigod status) Thief archetype can do so as well.

Perception and Survival are both Wisdom based, but that is about it.

Perception and Survival are both Wisdom based, but that is about it.

Perception - one's awareness and capability of spotting important things

If you can gain someone's experience with tracking, why can't you mimic their their natural tendency to be aware? their sharp sight?

But really, that's beside the point. What the mimic power does, which Iv'e never seen done before, is reference the term "class" in-game, which I think is a poor design choice. Classes are lumps of stereotypes that provide an easy way for the players to categorize characters. It's not an actual thing in the game world. And so you get a superficial distinction between things that can or cannot be gained by using the mimic power.

@Rynjin, the examples you brought up are spells that reuse mechanics used by other classes to describe what they do. It makes sense that you will have a *specific* spell that recreates things like anger (the rage spell) or gaining the knowledge you need to follow tracks. You can imagine a wizard developing a spell like that because it seems useful, and you can imagine a god being able to give his followers the power to make someone angry.

So a spell that simply makes your life easy by saying, "this makes someone angry, use the rules for rage to simulate this" instead of giving a reprint of the rage rules or (worse!) inventing a new subsystem to represent an angry combatant.

Again, my problem is with referencing the term "class features" in-game. Don't know how I can say that in a different way. Iv'e given the best examples I could think of, and repeated my point in as many ways as I could find to phrase it. Having said my piece, Which I hope was heard by the right people, I will once more face away and allow the discussion to get back on tracks :)

"Class features" and the like are referenced all over in the game mechanics, from rules to Feats to spells (less sure on this one, at least for the majority) and items.

That's because that's what they are. Mechanics.

Things that work and do something.

The fluff is basically "Hey you can do this, now with my Supernatural power I can do this too!", which is just fine and is a commonly used ability in fiction.

Alright, I actually do have one final idea of how to make what bugs me clearer - I think "Class Mimic" is at once too broad and too limited.

It's too broad because there are so many different class features, many of them not even printed yet. It's going to be incredibly hard to explain why that power can copy ALL of them. Some of them, like the dragon disciple abilities, are just inherited characteristics that stem from genetics. Others are representations of certain traits of the character, like the barbarian's DR. Still others represent experience and problem-solving style, like the rouges' sneak attack. That all of these (and many others that I'm sure exist) can be gained by use of the exact same power is weird.

It's too limited, because once you've established the things you CAN gain from it, other things should also be within your power to mimic, and yet you cannot. If you can mimic the Dragon Disciple's inherent strength, why not her height, which is every bit as dependent on genetics as her superhuman strength? If you can mimic a barbarian's DR, why can't you also mimic her HP pool? If you can mimic a rouge's sneak attack, why not his "appraise" skill ranks (simply another set of skills for solving another set of problems).
Why can't you mimic a feat? a racial ability? a weapon/armor proficiency?

The reason for these limitations is the term "class feature" that appears in the power descriptor, and that makes very little sense in games. Classes are abstractions. They are a game mechanic. In-game, the term should never come up. In game there is no difference between a feat and a class features, between rank in a skill and a class ability that grants bonuses to that skill (here's another great example - you can mimic a bard's "bardic knowledge" class feature but not his knowledge skill ranks. Can't see how those two are inherently different in-game).

OK, rant over. For real this time :P

I think you're looking at it too much from an in-game, setting standpoint.

You're nitpicking an ability for some reason I can't fathom.

The answer to all of those questions? Balance. Mechanical simplicity as well to an extent.

They obviously did not want those things to be possible, either because they ARE imbalanced or because they SEEMED imbalanced. Vice versa the things that ARE or SEEM balanced ARE allowed. Some of the things that shouldn't be possible because of "genetics" or whatever fluff reason for not allowing it are not balance issues, and excluding them specifically because of "logic" (which has never stopped the Dev Team before, so it's not like there's precedent for "logic" over balance) would be a waste of word count and an arbitrary limitation.

That's the answer.

No, it's not an in-setting answer, because it's not an in-setting question.

I think some people forget that while this is a ROLE PLAYING game, it is also, just as importantly, a role playing GAME.

Mechalibur wrote:

So, correct me if I'm wrong here, but can you do this with abundant healing:

It says 'target', not 'targets'. I would rule that only the overflow from one creature can be transferred to others.

Right, but it's a trigger, so you'd really be healing 25hp 10 times rather than 250 like I said. The text doesn't say once per spell, just whenever a target is healed.

Ah, so you dislike it for the exact reason I like it.

Yep, seems that way. I dislike it but like most rules I dislike It would still get use at my table. I'd probably just never use it. As has always been the case some things I like, some I don't. TO me, and again without really seeing the book its probably pointless peculation, it's a little like having a feat that allows a standard character to pick a class feature form an some other class - you know sort of I take a feat and now my fighter can use rage as a barbarian, or channel energy as a cleric. That's most likely a bad analogy but that's how I see it.

I'm keep throwing my money at the screen but nothing's happening D:< I want to download naoww!!

I am cruious to see how amazing initiave end up. It was actual edit during the play test and caused a lot of debate on the board both before and after the update. SKR can you give us an update on it?

I can! :D You gain a bonus equal to your mythic tier on initiative checks. You can spend one use of mythic power on your turn as a free action to take an additional standard action during your turn, which cannot be used to cast spells and you can do this only once per turn.

Seems pretty balanced to me, especially compared to the prior version and doesn't overpower spellcasters. It actually seems kinda weaksauce for them, aside from the initiative bonus, while giving martials what amounts to "Pounce x/day". Yikes. Although I don't know if using a consumable item like a wand would count as "casting a spell".

And on I go, just on page 12 so far...

KainPen wrote:

I am cruious to see how amazing initiave end up. It was actual edit during the play test and caused a lot of debate on the board both before and after the update. SKR can you give us an update on it?

I can! :D You gain a bonus equal to your mythic tier on initiative checks. You can spend one use of mythic power on your turn as a free action to take an additional standard action during your turn, which cannot be used to cast spells and you can do this only once per turn.

Seems pretty balanced to me, especially compared to the prior version and doesn't overpower spellcasters. It actually seems kinda weaksauce for them, aside from the initiative bonus, while giving martials what amounts to "Pounce x/day". Yikes. Although I don't know if using a consumable item like a wand would count as "casting a spell".

And on I go, just on page 12 so far...

yeah that what edited it to in the play test update, but Jason was thinking about changing it again and asked for more suggestions.

Well, that's the final version.