| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most of what we play are APs and I require one trait from the AP itself. As a result, players typically can't get MM campaign traits unless we are actually playing MM (we were on Saturday, until drama).
That said, slayer or ranger seems a synergistic dip.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ooh... I’ll just mention that some new hexes in Potions and Poisons make this very appealing. For two hexes, your fortitude saves go from “I didn’t need to not be paralyzed” to “No, you make a fortitude save.” And they’re non-scaling, so even if your GM decides that your hexes are 0th level with a DC of 10 + Int, you’ve got something really useful.
I've never been in a game where you can select a trait from another campaign. There's a reason you can get trapfinding for a trait in Mummy's Mask...
I've seen the opposite. I often play in games that aren't official AP's and it's not uncommon to see campaign traits allowed. There is also no 'trait from another campaign' issue in a game doesn't have any of it's own.
There are also a set of Campaign Traits not linked to ANY Campaign: see Black Sheep, Favored Son/Daughter and Outlander from the Advanced Player's Guide.
Just take Disable Device as one of your rogue skill unlock and at 10 ranks you can disable magical traps as if you had the class feature (though at a -10). Plenty of ways to boost it between skill focus, tools, and other things.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Campaign Traits are often vastly more powerful than non-Campaign Traits (often the equivalent of two Traits or more). I've never allowed them in a game that wasn't that specific AP (including many home games of various sorts), nor seen anyone else do so, and would strongly advise against it.
This is not to say it doesn't happen in some games, but noting that it isn't gonna be universally available is very valid.
This is not to say it doesn't happen in some games, but noting that it isn't gonna be universally available is very valid.
*shrug* to each their own I guess. I figure it goes without saying as DM's generally lay out what is or isn't allowed before characters start so people shouldn't really have to make special mention of 'gunslingers might not be allowed', 'weapon mods might not be allowed' or 'Campaign Traits might not be allowed'.
It's truly a rare game that I make a character for without knowing what's allowed or not before creation.
PS: "Campaign Traits are often vastly more powerful than non-Campaign Traits": Just as often, they are almost identical too. there is a VAST power difference in traits. For instance, I'd argue fate's favored is more powerful than finding magic traps... Or take Serpent Runner: none of the options are better than standard trait options and in fact some I think every one is beaten by 'normal' traits.
|
|
*shrug* to each their own I guess. I figure it goes without saying as DM's generally lay out what is or isn't allowed before characters start so people shouldn't really have to make special mention of 'gunslingers might not be allowed', 'weapon mods might not be allowed' or 'Campaign Traits might not be allowed'.
It's truly a rare game that I make a character for without knowing what's allowed or not before creation.
Well, the thing about this is that not allowing Campaign Traits outside that Campaign is the RAW. Allowing them is a House Rule. Noting that House rules aren't gonna be useful is standard procedure.
PS: "Campaign Traits are often vastly more powerful than non-Campaign Traits": Just as often, they are almost identical too. there is a VAST power difference in traits. For instance, I'd argue fate's favored is more powerful than finding magic traps... Or take Serpent Runner: none of the options are better than standard trait options and in fact some I think every one is beaten by 'normal' traits.
'Serpent Runner'?
Anyway, you're right to some degree, some APs are less blessed with powerful Campaign Traits than others, but pretty much all of those in Mummy's Mask are worth a full Feat each (Blood of the Pharaohs gives both a +1 to two skills, a Class Skill, and a +1 Will Save, for example), and it's not the only AP that's true of.
In terms of normal Traits being better...Fate's Favored is in a weird place where it's either vastly better or borderline worthless depending on build, and doesn't compare well to basically any other Trait (being easily worth a Feat for those it's good for)...but is also an isolated incident. I can't think of any other normal Traits close to as good as several Campaign Traits.
Well, the thing about this is that not allowing Campaign Traits outside that Campaign is the RAW. Allowing them is a House Rule. Noting that House rules aren't gonna be useful is standard procedure.
Did you miss the fact that there are setting neutral Campaign Traits? As such, it seems that they are as much a houserule as traits in general...
I can't think of any other normal Traits close to as good as several Campaign Traits.
Surprise Weapon, Ancestral Weapon, Shield-Trained and Improvised Defense are all worth at least a feat individually.
Secondly, many are niche/focused to be powerful for the AP: this makes them much less so outside it. For instance, in a normal game, Robot Slayer is a normal powered trait compared to it's being in Iron Gods. Ancestral Weapon beats it hands down in the average game.
Thirdly, Mummy's Mask traits fall into the above: niche. While they give something extra, it's not super useful outside of Osirion. Bonus sale price for relics of Ancient Osirion, bonus on Ancient Osirion style buildings, saves vs mummy, ect. Trap finder seems pretty tame on the power level IMO: seems about feat level, just like several other non-Campaign Traits mentioned.
Although, it's really pointless in the end as the relative power and availability of it is going to be for the DM to gauge: If he's allowing Campaign Traits, the argument is already over there: it's more appropriateness for the game at that point instead of power.
EDIT: "'Serpent Runner'?" I brought it up as it a Campaign Trait I've used the most, several times, without the slightest issue: It, Armor Expert, Sargavan Guard and a disadvantage allow for -3 ACP which opens up a LOT of armors for those not proficient in them.
|
|
Did you miss the fact that there are setting neutral Campaign Traits? As such, it seems that they are as much a houserule as traits in general...
Uh...let's look at the official word on Campaign Traits, shall we?
Campaign traits are specifically designed to tie your character into a campaign's storyline, and often give you a built-in reason to begin the first adventure. For this reason, GMs usually create their own campaign traits for their PCs. If your GM uses campaign traits, one of your starting traits must be a campaign trait. Your other trait can be chosen from one of the other types of traits.
That's a really clear statement that they aren't always available and should not be shuffled between campaigns.
Surprise Weapon, Ancestral Weapon, Shield-Trained and Improvised Defense are all worth at least a feat individually.
Of those, I strongly disagree that any except Shield-Trained are anywhere near as good as a Feat. The others are all highly situational in their application in a way that makes them way worse than most Feats, IMO.
But even assuming they are as good as Feats, that's a tiny list. The entirety of the Traits in many APs are at Feat level.
Secondly, many are niche/focused to be powerful for the AP: this makes them much less so outside it. For instance, in a normal game, Robot Slayer is a normal powered trait compared to it's being in Iron Gods. Ancestral Weapon beats it hands down in the average game.
This is certainly true of some Traits, yes. It's not a reason to allow them all, though.
Thirdly, Mummy's Mask traits fall into the above: niche. While they give something extra, it's not super useful outside of Osirion. Bonus sale price for relics of Ancient Osirion, bonus on Ancient Osirion style buildings, saves vs mummy, ect. Trap finder seems pretty tame on the power level IMO: seems about feat level, just like several other non-Campaign Traits mentioned.
Uh...no. As mentioned, Blood of the Pharaohs is pretty straightforwardly worth a Feat, and the same is true of most other Traits from Mummy's Mask if examined (most give two class skills and bonuses to them if nothing else).
Although, it's really pointless in the end as the relative power and availability of it is going to be for the DM to gauge: If he's allowing Campaign Traits, the argument is already over there: it's more appropriateness for the game at that point instead of power.
That can vary quite a bit from person to person and game to game.
That's a really clear statement that they aren't always available and should not be shuffled between campaigns.
They made a category and made traits without requirements in it... You seem to be taking the word "usually" and replacing it with "always".
Secondly, I NEVER said they were always available: I just mentioned that if they were, there where setting neutral ones. I've seen nothing here that invalidates them from use.
Of those, I strongly disagree that any except Shield-Trained are anywhere near as good as a Feat. The others are all highly situational in their application in a way that makes them way worse than most Feats, IMO.
Ancestral Weapon gives a +1 to hit an an easy to obtain/maintain weapon plus the ability to have a mastercraft version of that at 1st for +2 to hit: better than weapons focus at start and continues to match it as you level. [and it stacks]
Surprise Weapon: with Gloves of Improvised Might, improvised weapon builds are viable. A straight up +2 to hit is twice that of weapon focus, and with easy access to ways to negate the normal -4, it is easily a feat worth.
Improvised Defense: it's a simple/easy +1 AC right next to dodge for those not using a shield. With the inclusion of Stiletto boots into the game, most anyone can be wielding an improvised weapon and still have ALL the normal options available.
PS: "highly situational"? There are a LOT of feats that are that way you know... How often am I jumping out of a tree to charge someone? [it's a feat...]
This is certainly true of some Traits, yes. It's not a reason to allow them all, though.
LOL That's funny, as my point has been that they aren't all so strong as you should blanket DISALLOW them. When you said "Campaign Traits are often vastly more powerful than non-Campaign Traits", you made that sound like they were universally so: some don't even outperform normal traits.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Y'know, after this post, I'm done having this (extremely off-topic) argument in this thread. The mere fact that we're having it proves my original point (ie: many GMs, like me, will not allow Campaign Traits).
I'm especially done with being responded to selectively, and basically only in regards to things that diverge greatly from the main point. Arguing with people who cherry pick what they respond to has never gone anywhere productive for me, so I don't do it any more.
It's very possible you're entirely right about certain highly specific Traits, but that's really a complete side issue to the one I was commenting on, and not one I'm interested in discussing at any length.
Y'know, after this post, I'm done having this (extremely off-topic) argument in this thread.
Yes Please!
The mere fact that we're having it proves my original point (ie: many GMs, like me, will not allow Campaign Traits).
Neither of us have anything other than anecdotal evidence to show how often those traits are allowed so I wasn't arguing that: it's unprovable either way.
cherry pick
I picked certain data points to easily dispute what sounded like a universal truth from you. If you didn't wish to comment/post on that issue, it was a bad idea to post about it in the first place. When you post in absolutes, how can you expect anything other than 'cherry picked' instances where it isn't true if the other side disagrees.
Y'know, after this post, I'm done having this (extremely off-topic) argument in this thread.
That's fine but I'd disagree on its being even slightly off-topic as trap finder is a viable solution to wanting a 'rogue with hexes' that can still disable magic traps: it was a direct reply to someone saying they wanted to play it and keep trapfinding...
Yes Please!
No one was stopping you or anyone else from posting something different. ;)
Myself, I'm more than willing to continue to disagree with Deadmanwalking or comment on any other post in the thread. He did the correct thing if you don't want to continue a debate: stop replying.