Search Posts
So, if a wizard takes a ring as a bonded item, but it isn't enchanted, does it count against the 2 magical ring limit that a character can wear and benefit from? For example, a wizard has a bonded ring but has not been able to enchant it yet. He then attains a ring of feather falling and a ring of protection +1. Do all three rings function?
Quick question here... does the bonus from Arcane Strike stack with a magical weapon's bonus? I don't see any sort of bonus "type" in the feat description, but there isn't a reference either way to determine if it would stack. Considering it requires using your swift action for the round and only increases the damage, to me it seems to be pretty similar to Power Attack (trading the swift action for the penalty to attack, with a lesser bonus damage), so it seems like it should stack...
Just seeing how others feel about requiring a feat to selectively exclude enemies from the healing of Channel Energy? Personally, it seems to me that almost every cleric with a moderate Charisma would end up taking the feat at some point. If so, then why bother having it cost a feat? What I would like to see is that the selective feature be integrated into the basic channel energy ability. With the idea that you are channelling positive energy at your deity's will, would your deity really want you healing your enemies also? I'm also not sure I like it tied directly to the character's Charisma. Possibly instead have it start at excluding 1 character at 1st level and increasing by one every time the amount of damage/healing is increased (2 at 3rd, 3 at 5th, etc.) Thoughts? Or is everyone else happy with the way it works now?
Just tossing out a couple changes our group has decided to include from some pre-playtest conversations and a little bit of actual playtest (only one session so far). Channel Energy - This one came from actual gameplay. The DM feels that the 1d6 healing is too low and has decided to play (for now at least) with a +1 per cleric level bonus to the roll. So, a first level cleric heals 1d6+1 and a 3rd heals 2d6+3 for example. Smite - this has been a sticking point for me when it comes to Paladins for quite some time and our pre-playtesting conversations came up with a possibly solution we are going to try out. The Smite Evil ability (and similar domain powers like Battle Smite for the War domain) are going to be treated as 3-round "charges". Basically, if a Paladin (or Cleric of War) decides to use their smite ability, they declare it and it "charges" their weapon. The weapon stays charged for 3 rounds or until a successful attack is made, whichever comes first. This will give the Paladins the chance to use one of their abilities without fearing wasting it just because of a bad dice roll, especially since they get so few of them. If they can't land a successful attack in 3 rounds, then the "charge" dissipates and the ability is lost. Thoughts? We didn't really get too much done in our first session, so hopefully I will be able to start posting actual playtest info from our next one.
OK, with the new channel energy rules apparently Paizo has made some significant changes to the Glory domain. What exactly would hte Touch of Glory ability for the domain actually affect? Maybe our group plays differently, but I don't remember the last time anyone made a Charisma ability check.... Or, would this adjustment to Charisma affect things like the DC for turning undead or any other DC-based ability that is based on Charisma? Basically, from my reading at the moment, I can't think of anything other than skill checks that would benefit from the ability. Or am I missing something???
This has come up while preparing for our new campaign. Our DM grants a bonus feat at 1st level as a "regional" feat from a list. One of the feats on the list is Toughness and it seems to have become extremely popular now. My interpretation of the feat is that it grants 4 extra hp at 1st level (3 hp + 1 per hit dice) then an additional hp per hd/level gained. The DM thinks it means 3 hp at first level and +1 hp each level after. Of course, I don't care either way but I was wondering how others were reading the feat description as I thought it was pretty clear.
Actually, this applies to any human character that takes a warrior class... I'm not sure this was brought up during the Alpha, but our group is getting ready to start a new compaign and we were waiting for the Beta to be released to see if there were any changes. One thing we noticed was that the Human weapon training ability is worthless for any warrior-based class (Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Paladin) becuase they already gain all martial weapons. We decided that if it wasn't changed, we would house-rule it so that it provides a free Weapon Focus feat if the class already has proficiency in all martial weapons. What are other people's thoughts on this? We didn't want to give out free exotic weapon proficiencies since those weapons tend to be better than their martial counterparts.
Personally, I think the Evoker's specialist ability is too weak, so here is how I would like to see it modified. Specialist Bonus: Whenever you cast an evocation spell that deals damage, it deals +1 damage. This bonus applies once for area effect spells or once per missile or ray. This damage is of the same type as teh spell. This bonus increase by +1 for every 5 casters levels you possess, to a maximum of +5 at 20th level. I know some people would like to see the bonus damage applied to each dice of damage, but that seems to be too much to me, especially for spells like Fireball. At the same time, limiting the bonus damage to one missle or ray seems a little weak, not to mention requiring more work (though not much) in determining which target would take the extra damage. If they were subject to an area-of-effect spell they would all suffer the extra damage, so why not if they were just a second (or third) target hit by a ray or missile attack? Of course, I'm sure there are some that think this would be too powerful (for situations like Magic Missile with 5 missiles at 10th level dealing an additional 15 points of damage). As an alternative the damage could just apply once per target. If a 10th level Evoker targets 2 opponents with Magic Missile (5 missiles), one would take two missiles and the other 3, with both opponnents taking a total of 3 additional points of damage due to the speicalist ability. This would be the same as if they were both subject of a fireball spell. What are other people's thoughts on this?
Similar to how the skills have been combined, I would really like to see some of the spells narrowed down. For example, do we really need a seperate "Protection from" for evil, good, lawful, chaotic, etc.? Why not just have a single "Proctection from" spell and allow the caster to choose they type when being cast? Same for "Magic Circle" spells. On a similar note, some other spells can be combined, like enlarge person/reduce person. This has been something that really irritated me since 3.5. I still haven't seen a good reason for breaking up all the spells, especially for characters like the sorcerer. |
