So I got my copy of the EPG yesterday and was reading up on Dragonmarks in 4e. Dragonmarks are feats that can be taken at any point.
If you take a Dragonmark, they basically sum up how you relate to the world in four different ways (all for flavour, no real crunch to it)
1. You become an heir of a Dragonmarked house.
2. You become an distant offshoot of a Dragonmarked bloodline. (If the house finds out about you, they would express interest in you)
3. You take any Dragonmark, regardless of what race you are. The Dragonmarked houses show no interest and the Dragonmark is considered a direct manifestation of the Prophecy.
4. You take an Aberrant Dragonmark. These are 3-4 specific feats such as Mark of Fear, etc. The houses will hunt you down if the mark is discovered.
Not sure how much I like number 3. I am torn between houseruling it out so that it can't be done, or houseruling the fluff part of it, and treating them as Aberrant Dragonmarks. Personally, I would think that (the majority of) House Cannith would be quite upset if a Warforged developed the Mark of Making.
There is no least, lesser or greater Marks, and no Siberys mark either. I am trying to think of ways to introduce some of these back in. If you take the dragonmarks feats as is and consider them lesser marks, then you could introduce Paragon level feats that improve on them'
example:
Lesser Mark of Finding: An enemy granting combat advantage shifts you can shift into the square he just vacated.
Greater Mark of Finding: An enemy granting combat advantage shifts you can shift into the square he just vacated and make a basic melee attack.
Lesser Mark of Warding: +1 AC to powers that provideiberys defense bonuses and marked enemies suffer -3 to attacks when targeting others.
Greater Mark of Warding: +2 AC to powers that provide defense bonuses and marked enemies suffer -4 to attacks when targeting others.
Siberys is a bit more difficult. I am thinking it could either be a Paragon path, or another level of feats at Epic Level
As far as I know, A Dragonmark on the wrong race is considered an aberrant mark regardless of the colour of the actual mark.
That said, Any Info on the actual Aberrant marks, are they in the book?
That was my belief as well, but it looks like in 4e they dropped this.
I don't have the book here (at work ;) ), but there are 3-4 aberrant Dragonmarks. Each is a seperate feat and each provides a different effect (I think one is Mark of Contagion, one is Mark of Fear).
One thing that I don't think they said (may be wrong, only skimmed through last night) was the disclaimer that you could only have 1 mark.
They did talk (via a sidebar) about how retraining a Mark (since it is a feat) should not be done and that a DM would be in his rights to determine that a Mark is a lifelong commitment.
I kinda like the idea. The Dragonmarks can show up anywhere, but it is a rare - if not unique - occasion when they do so. That seems to allow for interesting character concepts while preserving the core flavor of the setting. Just treat it as strange - or stranger - than manifesting Aberrant Dragonmarks, and it all seems to fit.
I am thinking of going that way too. It doesn't restrict playter's options, and offers up all sorts of story telling goodness. And they do provide a new ritual called "Hide Dragonmark", so it's all good.
Now to lesser and greater dragonmarks. Some seem easier than others to improve on. The Lesser ones below are the ones provided in the EPG. The Greater ones are my initial ideas. Let me know what you think, and also any other ideas you may have on this
Mark of Detection:
(Lesser) You roll twice for Perception checks. You can sense magic and can use Perception in place of Arcana to detect magic.
(Greater) You roll twice for Perception checks. You can sense magic and can use Perception in place of Arcana to detect magic. Add 1d6 to these checks.
Mark of Finding:
(Lesser) An enemy granting combat advantage shifts you can shift into the square he just vacated.
(Greater) An enemy granting combat advantage shifts you can shift into the square he just vacated and you can make a basic melee attack.
Mark of Handling:
(Lesser) Benefits of Mounted Combat feat and while mounted +2 to speed and +1 AC. The same benefits apply to your beast companion.
(Greater) Benefits of Mounted Combat feat and while mounted +4 to speed and +2 AC. The same benefits apply to your beast companion.
Mark of Healing:
(Lesser) Allies can make a save whenever you heal them.
(Greater) Allies can make a save vs. all ongoing effects whenever you heal them.
Mark of Hospitality:
(Lesser) Allies within 10 restore maximum hp possible during a short rest.
(Greater) Allies within 10 restore maximum hp (plus 1D6) possible during a short rest.
Mark of Making:
(Lesser) Use Enchant Magic Item ritual and make Alchemical items as two levels higher.
(Greater) Use Enchant Magic Item ritual and make Alchemical items as Four levels higher.
Mark of Passage:
(Lesser) When a power lets you shift or teleport, +1 square.
(Greater) When a power lets you shift or teleport, +2 square.
Mark of Scribing:
(Lesser) Gain fluency in four new languages and +2 to Diplomacy.
(Greater) Gain fluency in four new languages and +2 to Diplomacy.
(Basically these stack)
Mark of Sentinel:
(Lesser) When making an opportunity attack shift 1 as a free action before or after.
(Greater) When making an opportunity attack shift 1 as a free action before or after and the target grants you combat advantage until the end of your next turn.
Mark of Shadow:
(Lesser) Remain hidden or invisible if you miss with your attack.
(Greater) Remain hidden or invisible if you miss with your attack. When attacking from hidden or invisible, attacks do 1D6 extra damage
Mark of Storm:
(Lesser) You gain +1 to speed when flying and thunder or lightning powers slide enemies 1 square.
(Greater) You gain +2 to speed when flying and thunder or lightning powers slide enemies 2 squares and knock the target prone.
Mark of Warding:
(Lesser) +1 AC to powers that provide defense bonuses and marked enemies suffer -3 to attacks when targeting others.
(Greater) +2 AC to powers that provide defense and marked enemies suffer -4 to attacks when targeting others.
I was thinking that the marks were originally created by means of inspiration by the prophecy but unknown to all bar the dragons and the older version of the Silver Flame faith and perhaps the bound rakhasa lords they were created by a small group of dragons who used them as a means of building a resistance force in the future battle since they knew the binding of the rakhasa's wasn't permanent only for as long as their binder lives which is why the silver flame in wherever its called is so important, its actually binding several rakhasa's not just one really big one and the aberrant mark is really the vol mark corrupted by the insane actions of the elves and dragons.
Now in that first book they all but described a very nasty way a character can gain a dragonmark when they're the wrong race but that doesn't mean they can't gain one anyway its just that there's more to their legacy than just what is presumed to be an aberrant dragonmark.
Still thanks for this thread its an interesting read and I'd like to hear what else you think of it hopefully next month I can pick up the epg but until then I'll keep my eyes peeled for your discussion!
Now to lesser and greater dragonmarks. Some seem easier than others to improve on. The Lesser ones below are the ones provided in the EPG. The Greater ones are my initial ideas. Let me know what you think, and also any other ideas you may have on this.
Wouldn't the ones in the book be Least?
i dont have the book but I thought it was just marked or not now (probably level/tier determining how epic your mark is)?
If it is this way, I'm very happy. Big chains of feats are A> Boring B> Disincentive to continue taking them.
RAW, taking is non-level and non-race restricted feats. There is no least/lesser/greater/Siberys marks. Just Marks as they previously existed, and (I think) 4 Aberrant Dragon Marks.
This was just an exercise in how to make Dragonmarks more like they were in the previous version.
Now to lesser and greater dragonmarks. Some seem easier than others to improve on. The Lesser ones below are the ones provided in the EPG. The Greater ones are my initial ideas. Let me know what you think, and also any other ideas you may have on this.Wouldn't the ones in the book be Least?
Probably...I am just lazy and didn't want to come up with a third tier :)
I have the book in front of me now, so I can elaborate on a few points.
-They do restrict you to one dragonmark feat (I thought they may have missed it).
The Aberrant marks are as follows:
Aberrant Mark of Contagion: Whenever you hit an enemy with a daily attack power, that enemy takes a -2 penalty to saving throws against ongoing damage until the end of the encounter.
Aberrant Mark of Madness: Whenever you hit an enemy with a daily attack power, that enemy takes a -2 penalty to Will until the end of the encounter.
Aberrant Mark of Terror: Whenever you hit an enemy with a daily attack power, that enemy takes a -1 penalty to attack rolls against you until the end of the encounter. (This is a fear effect)
So they released a Design and Development article today discussing Cragonmarks and the changes. (Article written by James Wyatt)
[summary]
They summarize the design used in the initial implementation of Dragonmarks in 3.5 (Least,Lesser,Greater, Siberys prestige class, racial restrictions, etc.)
They then talk about how it was assumed, due to the work on Spellscars in FR, that Dragonmarks would go the same way, but they decided to ask one question: "Did dragonmarks in 3e accomplish what we wanted them to?"
They felt that answer was 'No' due to the following reasons:
- A lot of players weren't using Dragonmarks at all becuase the powers were much more useful in explaining the dragonmarked houses economic operation and monopolies than they were for adventuring characters.
- Some marks were ignored (for the most part) because their spell-like abilities were even less game-useful than others
-Few people played high enough levles to become heirs of Siberys where the powers became relevant
-People felt constrained by the immutable relationship between races and dragonmarks
-Most importantly, the wrong people took them (They used the example of Halflings and the Mark of Healing. This character should be the best healer there is, but at the table the halfling with the Mark of Healing was a rogue who could cast cure light wounds once a day.
This question (and the answers) led to the following decisions:
- Dragonmarks should make you better at what you do
- Dragonmarks should be approximately equal in their attractiveness to the player characters
- people shouldn't need to choose a race they don't necessarily want to play in order to get the mark effect they want.
They go on to discuss the last point (no race restrictions), the fact that there are paragon paths for each Dragonmarked House, that there are backgrounds associated with each house that provides some skill bonuses and that the Mark of Siberys is still around, but not in the game yet (Possibly in Dragon in the future)
[/summary]
I have to say, as a fan of Eberron (both the campaign and all of the books), I don't think I like the lifting of racial restrictions.
Their assertation that "The wrong people took" the feats just seems wrong to me. If a player decided to be a Halfling Rogue with the Mark of Healing, I would assume that they had a story reason for it. They left the Talenta Plains and headed to Sharn where they were approached by the local thieves guild and forced into working for them. Along the way, they discovered a love of larceny. If they just wanted a straight-up rogue, then don't take the feat. Nowhere does it state that every halfling must take the Mark of Healing.
Dragonmarks have always seemed (to me) to be more about the story than the crunch. They were special, and by opening them up to any and all races seems to dilute their meaning to simply another feat.
Their assertation that "The wrong people took" the feats just seems wrong to me. If a player decided to be a Halfling Rogue with the Mark of Healing, I would assume that they had a story reason for it. They left the Talenta Plains and headed to Sharn where they were approached by the local thieves guild and forced into working for them. Along the way, they discovered a love of larceny. If they just wanted a straight-up rogue, then don't take the feat. Nowhere does it state that every halfling must take the Mark of Healing.'Story' as a sole motivator is good in theory - but rarely works in practice. Many players will come up with character concepts that they both find interesting, and think will be effective in play. Building to accomodate this, so that the two elements - background and effectiveness - are not at odds, is simply good design.
I mean, even with the 'story reason' at hand - why should the Mark of Healing be very useful for a non-healer and meaningless for a cleric? What possible benefit does that add to the game? Is anything lost by removing it?
With the new rules, everyone can still take the Marks for story reasons - but now the most appropriate characters are no longer mechanically discouraged from taking it. And for characters whom it is perhaps not as thematic for, but still could be appropriate for story reasons, it remains useful do to giving an appropriate Ritual use, which can be of benefit to anyone.
Dragonmarks have always seemed (to me) to be more about the story than the crunch. They were special, and by opening them up to any and all races seems to dilute their meaning to simply another feat.Doesn't that directly contradict your previous statement, that someone would only take it only for story reasons? ;)
Now, given that I then went on to say that shouldn't be a reason to excuse poor design, I'm not going to use it as a defense here - just thought the juxtaposition was amusing.
I do understand the...
lol...I find that I often contradict myself...keeps things interesting ;)
It just seems to be a shift from a race-based feat to a class-based feat (i.e. certain classes will see a lot more benefit from certain dragonmarks), and this is quite a fundemental change in how the world of Eberron used to work. (Again, a lot of this comes from reading the novels as well...).
I don't like limiting my players, so I think I am just going to houserule that if they want a Mark that is not associated with their race they must (a) come up with a reason why (beyond "It makes my abilities more powerful") and (b) these will be treated as Aberrant Dragonmarks and as abominations to the associated House. (I will even throw in the Hide Dragonmark ritual free of charge for them :) ).
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
I have to say, as a fan of Eberron (both the campaign and all of the books), I don't think I like the lifting of racial restrictions.
Their assertation that "The wrong people took" the feats just seems wrong to me. If a player decided to be a Halfling Rogue with the Mark of Healing, I would assume that they had a story reason for it. They left the Talenta Plains and headed to Sharn where they were approached by the local thieves guild and forced into working for them. Along the way, they discovered a love of larceny. If they just wanted a straight-up rogue, then don't take the feat. Nowhere does it state that every halfling must take the Mark of Healing.
Dragonmarks have always seemed (to me) to be more about the story than the crunch. They were special, and by opening them up to any and all races seems to dilute their meaning to simply another feat.
Disclaimer: No interest in 4E mechanics, just fluff.
I agree. for me, taking the dragonmark was an example of making a hook of the character. Whether it be a distant heir of Cannith who suddenly manifested the lesser mark of making, or a halfling assassin manifesting the mark of healing, or a half orc manifesting the mark of House Deneith(!) it all came down to more than 'take a feat' It was 'take a feat, realize it's going to affect your character, tell me how it affects him.'
To use the halfling rogue. Did he manifest the mark before or after he was trained as a rogue? Did he use it for the guild? Does anyone owe their lives to him because of the mark? Does Jorasco know about the mark? Is he a deep cover agent for the house? All these details are things I'm going to work with the player and go forward.
One of my favourite characters from Eberron was Nathaniel Mourn.
I gave him (as the player) the aberrant dragonmark that generated shield. It looked like a red/blue/black Denith dragonmark on his right arm, that seemed to peel itself off his arm when he evoked the shield effect. As the character he didn't want it. It was a mark of all he lost, homeland and family. That's why he took the name Mourn.
Eberron4 might retain enough of its original flavour to keep me interested in the fiction, unlike 4gotten Realms.