Ok so if a Drow Noble character where to take feats from Drow of the Underdark book would they be too powerful?
Specifically
Deceptive Illumination
Fascinating Illumination
Gift of the spider queen
Dazzling Fire
Radiant Flicker
Reactive Resistance
Of course that is saying that Deeper Darkness would count as darkness for the purpose of drow feat (Since it does evolve from their darkness ability according to one of the Nobility Feats)
Are the any feats I missed that might make a Drow noble just too powerful.
In my opinion. Drow Nobles are already too powerful and should not be allowed for PCs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So long as all the players want to play monstrous races, there's no problem with it. Someone could play a Centaur, someone could play a Minotaur, etc. How powerful is 'too' powerful is very much up for debate. If only one person is playing a race as powerful as the Drow Noble though, you may start to have issues, so make sure to clear it with the other players to make sure that's the sort of campaign they want to have.
EDIT: That being said, this seems to be in the wrong forum. The information linked to is from DnD, and this is the Pathfinder Advice section. Mixing rule-sets can be tricky, because the developers generally do not operate within the same limits. 3.5 is mooooostly compatible, but there were a LOT of supplements for it.
Deceptive Illumination specifically mentions daily uses... I would consider that a prereq. Also, it isn't pathfinder. Not broken.
Fascinating Illumination-same thing
Gift of the Spider Queen-same. Requires daily uses.
Dazzling Fire-if allowed, not that OP... though is still a D&D feat, not Pathfinder.
Radiant Flicker-requires a daily use of Faerie Fire.
Reactive Resistance-Immediate action, removing your swift action from the next round, not a game breaker.
These feats are all non-Pathfinder, so the DM could just veto them based on that. Also, anything talking about DAILY uses should REQUIRE daily, that is the limiting factor. If a DM allows use at will stuff to substitute for things designed ASSUMING daily uses, that's his problem.
As written, I wouldn't really care if those feats showed up in my game. Anything based off daily uses has limited use because of that, and if the race has unlimited use of the base ability, the feat doesn't work cause it is keyed of daily use, unless you rewrite it. If you rewrite it, and allow D&D material, you can just make pun-pun and this discussion is pointless.
I think some people are confusing the drow noble your talking about and paizo's drow noble..
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*looks at address bar*
Why would someone ask about a D&D character on a Paizo site?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Drow Noble
I am fairly sure that is the base being used.
And I disagree just because those abilities appear as At-Wills does not mean they have no daily use, their daily use is just unlimited.
So if you wanted to burn your feats on adding in two more spell-like abilities at will I don't see it as being to powerful because you are wasting a lot of feats to bring that concept online.
I think this question is making use of the 3.P concept, using 3.5 material in PF which I do all the time, general concepts, races, Prcs if they are specific enough to warrant it.
I am fairly sure that is the base being used.And I disagree just because those abilities appear as At-Wills does not mean they have no daily use, their daily use is just unlimited.
So if you wanted to burn your feats on adding in two more spell-like abilities at will I don't see it as being to powerful because you are wasting a lot of feats to bring that concept online.
I think this question is making use of the 3.P concept, using 3.5 material in PF which I do all the time, general concepts, races, Prcs if they are specific enough to warrant it.
I would argue that the feasts were written and balanced with the assumption that they modified daily use abilities. If they were intended for potentially unlimited use, they wouldn't have specified 'daily', they could have just used 'use'... But that isn't how it was written.
If we assume they could be used unlimited times per day, they become overpowered in my opinion.
I love Drow Nobles (Paizo), so totally worth a 1 level adjustment. :D My GM doesn't allow them, I don't blame him.
If you want a broken Drow Noble, look up The Noble Shades thread of the Shade template on the Drow Noble. Well worth the 3 level adjustment it gives to grant that many powers in the dark.
In Pathfinder you can create a drow noble by taking a regular drow with added drow noble chain feats. I see no problem with taking listed feats to expand abilities drow spell-like abilities.
Deceptive illumination: A silent image spell-like ability. No real problem.
Fascinating illumination: hypnotic pattern. Fascinate is broken by any obvious threat and allows saving throw in case of potential threats - which for paranoid drow culture is about anything.
Gift Of The Spider Queen: This is the only problematic feat of those listed: mirror image as an immediate action with unlimited number of uses might be a bit too much. This feat I would rebuild to allow using each of the listed effects once per day as a standard action.
Dazzling Fire: You want to spend a feat to bestow dazzled condition (-1 penalty to the opponent's attack rolls) with your faerie fire? Be my guest.
Radiant Flicker: Use faerie fire to grant one target short-duration melee-only blur? The unlimited use here might be a bit of a pain. A bit. I think instead I would go with an Improved Shadow Shroud feat that would allow drow to use Shadow Shroud feat on someone else within close range.
Reactive Resistance: Is ok.