Lucien Black's page

Organized Play Member. 14 posts. No reviews. 1 list. 1 wishlist. 1 Organized Play character.


Oceanshieldwolf wrote:
If you go to the My Downloads page that should tell you when each PDF was last updated.

So looking at that, it appears the downloads were last updated in July 2012 for Psionics Expanded, and in 2010 for Psionics Unleashed. Then I would just need to check any errata in the errata thread for dates after those to be sure I got it all. Is that right?

I may finally be having a chance to play a dread or a cryptic soon (yay!), but can't seem to figure out if I can/need to re-download my pdf's of Psionics Unleashed and Psionics Expanded to get the up to date errata. Is there a way to tell when the last time the downloads here were updated with errata?

Thank you!

Thanks for the response, Ryan, I appreciate it. I would certainly be interested in any further support. If you need inspiration, check out the Lightbringer series by Brent Weeks ("The Black Prism" is book one). All magic in that world is color based. Perhaps a prestige class to mimic the Prism of that world, granting access to all colors. Not sure how to balance that though. Right now, it's possible to gain access to *almost* all spells (conjuration sans subschools and illusion sans subschools is not available to any color, but each has a handful of spells) for the cost of two Cross Spectrum Study feats. IF the DM allowed the Arcane discovery Opposition Research to apply to spectrums, then for four more feats a player could eliminate the requirement of two spell slots needed for spells outside your primary spectrum. That's a heavy feat investment, but some might consider it worth it. What would a prestige class do with that? Allow easier access to spectrum powers outside your primary and complementary spectrums? Powers to combine color effects? Not sure.

For archetypes, perhaps a sorcerer archetype that lets them choose spells known from the list available to their color, rather than the usual sorcerer list? Do it as an archetype rather than a bloodline, and I could see a dragon bloodline choosing the same color as their dragon.

Speaking of dragons, any thoughts toward magic inspired by the metallic dragons, rather than the chromatic?

An old product, I know, but I just got it recently. I quite like it, but had some questions, if I may.

For the Quench ability, does not taking ill effects from not eating and drinking mean the mage simply no longer requires food and drink? As if using a ring of sustenance, minus the less sleep benefits?

Is it accurate that a mosaic mage knows all spells that are part of their spectrum, or do they need to learn them as a normal mage? If they know them automatically, does that include the complementary spectrums?

Any chance of more support in the form of new spectrum powers?

Since this is an alternate class for the wizard, can they take arcane discoveries?

Thanks for an awesome product!

Kirth Gersen wrote:
As usual, I've got to buck the trend, but I'd avoid "magister" precisely because that's already the name of the primary arcane spellcasting class (the wizard replacement, as it were) in all of Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved stuff.

I'm going to have to agree with this, that was the first thought I had.

Kirth Gersen wrote:

I'd also avoid "Arcanist" because that's general 3.0/3.5/PF slang for a "wizard or sorcerer," and avoid "warlock" because it's been used to death in both offical and 3rd party stuff.

Again, I'd agree. If I saw something called the "Warlock" in a guide, I'm going to automatically assume at first that it's something similar to the 3.5 warlock. Since I happen to like that class, I would be disappointed to realize it wasn't.

I'm putting in a vote for "thaumaturge."

Dave Gross wrote:

If you've read Prince of Wolves, please take a few minutes to answer these questions:

1. Apart from Chapter Two, which is the best chapter to read to folks who haven't yet read the book? I'd like to read a different chapter and point folks to the Chapter Two available free at

2. Help me settle a bet: Are you a member of "Team Radovan" or "Team Jeggare"? More importantly, why?

3. Which of the secondary characters would you most like to see again? Why? The "why" is the helpful part.

Thanks for taking the time to answer. I'm off for a few more hours to mind chores, after which it's back to work on [redacted], a story for the glorious Wayfinder, and then Chapter Seven of [redacted], the next Radovan & the Count novel.

1) I fear I'm no help with this one, for two reasons: I don't like having people read fiction to me, since the inflections and voice they use is almost always different from what I use in my head, and like others, I read this straight through, so chapters are blurred.

2) Team Jeggare. I always enjoy thinking, intelligent characters. I will admit that his noble attitude needs to have a swift kick in the behind at times. I wouldn't expect it to just disappear completely though, and something(s) would need to actually happen to shake it up. However, Radovan was also a lot of fun, and a nice contrast. In fact, I found them both more interesting when they were together and could be played off each other.

3) Azra, as long as we learn some answers about her. Mysteries are only fun when they are solvable, and she seems to have some mysteries to solve. Also, stage magicians stop being fun when they refuse to tell me how they did it.

Dabbler wrote:

I wonder, though. Perhaps sundering the mindblade should carry some sort of penalty? A save vs stunning, or a quantity of damage, or even a full round before the blade can be re-formed?

Whether this idea is a balance requirement, I do not at this time have an opinion. From a flavor perspective, I like it. Having the weapon that is literally an extension of yourself busted could reasonably be seen to cause some sort of feedback, penalizing you in some way. I'm not sure that damage is the way I would go with it, but I could easily see a save vs stunning/staggered/sickened.

On the other hand, nonlethal damage from psychic pain could be argued as well. Hmmm...

TriOmegaZero wrote:
I think it would be reasonable to allow it. Strict DMs might make you take a penalty on the rolls against all other targets for intentionally weakening your spell, but I think SR is a PC trap as it is anyway.

On that point, are you supposed to roll your caster level check once per spell, or once per creature? In the fireball example, if three creatures with spell resistance are in the area of effect, do you roll once, achieve a 20, and therefore fail versus the one creature with SR 22? Or roll three times?

The answer could easily affect how I would rule in this case. I have no issue with letting the caster deliberately weaken his spell to avoid being too good for his own good, but if you're only rolling the caster level check once, then the weakening applies to everyone hit by the spell. If you're rolling per creature, perhaps not.

It is hours after I should've gone to bed (thankfully I don't have to work tomorrow ... today), and I just finished reading the novel in one sitting. I thoroughly enjoyed it (though I have a critique or two), and I truly hope to see more of these characters in future novels.

I do have a question or two:

Are there rules available for the riffling scrolls? I rather enjoyed those. Related to that, how did Radovan use one without being a mage or other spellcaster?

Thank you much for an enjoyable read!

Here's the situation: Wizard 5 with bonded object (a ring) has spent a great deal of time studying the entities outside his home plane. Not in a religious sense, but more in an academic sense. He's very fascinated by them. Now, a fox has presented itself to him, with an offer: the opportunity to learn new forms of magic while also having regular communication with one of those very entities he's been studying for so long. In other words, multiclass to Witch.

The issue: the rules seem to be very clear that characters aren't supposed to have both bonded objects and familiars, but that rule was written before the witch became available, so how would this be handled (ignoring whether or not such a multiclass is optimal)?

Likewise things like starting as Wiz 5 w/bonded object, and then multiclassing into Sorcerer with the serpentine bloodline, gaining a viper familiar at 3rd Sorc level. The character may have struggled to ignore his mystical heritage for years, knowing full well where it comes from, and the familial responsibilities that come with acknowledging it, but is now embracing it. From a story perspective, the serpentine bloodline is the only choice available, as it's been in the family for generations, and the family embraces it -- but with requirements for anyone who displays the power.

A DM could just say no to any of these, or similar, but thats not (IMO) the best way to handle what could be very interesting story elements. So from a rules perspective, how can these, and similar ideas, be dealt with?

Thanks in advance for your thoughts.

Question on Spell Style, if I may.

It has the tag (Sp), making it seem like we're choosing spell-like abilities. However, the description consistently refers to the spells chosen as, well, spells. It even has arcane spell failure rules. The only part that makes me think the intent truly is spell-like is:

Quote wrote:

...learns a single 1st level spell he may cast twice a day.

At 12th level, the shadow assassin learns a second 1st level spell he may cast twice a day, . . .

That makes it seems that rather than knowing two 1st level spells that are prepared in the spell slots of your choice, you have two spell-like abilities, each mimicking a first level spell, each usable twice a day.

SO! My question is, which is it? Spell-like, or actual spells? If actual spells, do you have 2 or 4 first level spell slots (plus bonus spells, I assume)? And do you need a spell book?

Thank you!

Btw, I really like this class. At first blush I feared that it would be rather weak, but after plugging in some numbers, I pity the victim of Deadly Focus and Greater Deadly Focus. You succeeded in not stepping on the rogue's toes.

Thank you, makes sense.

I have a question, just to clarify: can you muli-class a Mystic Godling with and non-mystic godling? Say, Eldritch plus clever?

Also, I hate you, Super Genius Games! I'm late in discovering your stuff, and the wife doesn't think it's a good idea to give up eating for a week in order to buy all your previously released Guides that I want. How dare you put things out that tempt me so!

Sooo... can I take a stab in the dark and guess the inspiration came from Robin Hobb's Farseer trilogy? If so, then may I suggest getting inspired for a class based around the treatment Assassins get in that series? After all, why should all assassins be evil?