WizardsBlade's page

My one thing is to please make player made items useful (poisons, snares, ECT.) My suggestion would be giving these items scaling DCs would make them more practical and give players a larger selection as they level.

I like the difficult terrain idea. I might would also suggest a feat that allows grappling as a reaction.

They need to say pick 2 poisons of x level or lower. Picking poisons like sleep, with the increased DC would be great. Would also like to see more inhaled poisons at lower level to go with it.

Quick doesn't stack like that. Quick gives you 1 extra action to do something a that a quick effect allows you to do.

I think the way healing works currently seems pretty good, but I will admit I think treat wounds should have a limit per day as does seem op. There are feats like toughness to increase rest healing if you want a boost to rest healing.
From my experience my group always rest when we run out of spell resources, not because we are low on health.

Agreed all. 60% success rate just doesn't feel heroic it feels like a -D. And that's for characters that are trying to succeed.

The difference between athletics (strength based skills) and acrobatics (dexterity based skills) seem pretty decent to me. The athletics skills are more strength based skills and the acrobatics skills are more finesse or dexterity based skills. Most everything people do requires some strength and some dexterity. Even walking, requires muscles to move and balance to stay up right.

I like the idea of variable action cantrips, but there just needs to be a few and if you want it you can take it.
I also like the idea of changing the casting rules to allow casting across turns. Such as spending 1 action this turn for the first action of a spell and then finishing the casting on the next turn. Normal casting and concentration mechanics would still have to apply. Such as if your hit between turns you must maintain concentration and you must use your action to finish the spell or the spell would be lost.

Say I am massively multiclassed, have multiple innate spells, have multiple items that allow me to cast shield, or some combination of the above. How may times can I have the shield spell knocked down?

Let's say I have a wizard with the shield cantrip, who is an elf that took shield as part of his otherworldly magic ancestry feat. On round 1 he casts shield off the wizard list (highest caster level). Later in the round he uses his reaction to block a magic missile attack, so he cannot use that cantrip again for 10 minutes. On round 2 he wants to cast his innate shield spell. What happens?

shield spell says "After you use Shield Block, the spell is dismissed and you can’t cast it again for 10 minutes." So it appears you can't recast it in round 2. Maybe if there was a way to get shield without casting it, like from an item.

I also like this idea, maybe not the specifics, but definitely the general idea for this kind of skill feats. The one suggestion I would add is that the feats should increase with proficiency (like cats fall).

My suggestion is as follows:

Untrained: Level -2 and roll 2D20, take the lowest

Trained: Level and normal D20 roll

Expert: Level +1 and normal D20 roll, or can take 10 for typical/no stress tasks.

Master: Level +2 and roll 2D20, take highest, or can take 10 for typical/no stress tasks.

Legendary: Level +3 and roll 3D20, take highest, or can take 10, even in stressful situations.

This maintains the math spacing, while still giving significant value for higher proficiencies. Structurally, you could extend it beyond skills to just about all D20 rolls (attacks, saves, etc), although it would make monster stat blocks slightly more complex (although I don't think they would get bigger - there is mostly lots of whitespace to add a letter : U /E/M/L where needed.

When you look at the numbers you are suggesting there is a huge difference in an average untrained and legendary. Because of the way roll 2d20 take lower works an average roll would be level +5 -2 or level +3, with double the normal chance of rolling a critical fail. Trained get an average roll of 10 so that works out ok. Expert is just 11 so not a big change. Master becomes an average roll of 17. And legendary becomes something close to 21 average roll. That is a very large spread. It's hard to mix +modifiers with a +mod system and keep the numbers close.

While I like the way this sounds the porblems come out in combat. For example an master in athletics grapples an untrained in athletics and acrobatics wizard. The wizard can never escape.
Now I actually don't really see a huge problem with this as it make sense, but it does show where things could go wrong later down the line.

After reading more comments I think I have another way to help keep the numbers closer together and still make both the generalist and the specialist happy. The progression goes like this:
Untrained: -4
Trained: 0
Expert: 1
Master: 2
Legendary: roll 2d20 take the higher +1
The maximum number spread is only 6 so that challenges never leave anyone in impossible territory. While at the same time gives a big boost to legendary. When a higher of 2d20 roll is used it doubles the chance of a crit and greatly reduces the chance of a critical fail. Additional, taking the higher of 2d20 increases the odds getting a higher value on the die, increasing the odds of passing DC. The +1 on the legendary assures that at no point will master have a greater chance of beating a DC than Legendary.

I completely agree with the OP. The one some change would make so many things useful that are almost useless now.
As for feats that do something similar I would suggest just the feat just add a +1 or +2 to DCs.

The biggest problem with this is it's ramifications to other things. Can you swing 2 one handed swords as a single action or toss 2 bombs at the same time. The action requirements are there mainly for balance. I do like the idea of makeing a spell multiple actions and just listing the components that are done during those actions. The down side is that when a spell is interupted with an aoo a caster might only lose one action, if it where changed the caster might lose 2 or 3 actions.

The entry for Injury Poisons reads :

Quote:

Injury

An injury poison activates when applied to a weapon,
and it affects the target of the first Strike made using the
poisoned weapon. If that Strike is a success or a critical
success and deals piercing or slashing damage, the target
must attempt a saving throw against the poison. If the
Strike is a failure or a critical failure, or if it fails to deal
slashing or piercing damage for some other reason, the
poison is spent but the target is unaffected.

It seems pretty harsh and strange that your poison is spent if you fail your attack. I can get it for bows and crossbows (the poison is not really spent but you lost your arrow), but on melee weapons, the poison does not magically disappear after you swing your blade at the void. In my opinion, injury poisons should be spent when you apply them to your weapon, but should stay potent until you hit someone with your weapon, then your weapon loses the poison's effects.

My GM says that I fling off the poison when I attempted to strike, but I agree with you. Poisons are costly and already have fairly low DCs. My experience has been that poisons are a waist of resources, as they have a decent chance of missing on the hit and then again on the save.