Personally, I think we're going to see a change in the current wording of invoke rune. If they make it so you can only choose which runes to invoke by name, and all copies of that rune in range invoke automatically, then combined with the "multiple copies of a specific rune only affect a creature once" rule, we get rid of some of the multiple invokes in the same round cheese.
You would still be able to stack an Atryl, Ranshu, and Esvadsir going off at once to hit one enemy for 6d6/rank damage, of course, but without Sun- attached to one, that's it. That's the burst. There's no second action to trigger a second Esvadsir that was pre-engraved or a second Atryl that's waiting to be detonated.
Making invoke affect all copies of a given rune in range could cause issues of course with setting off Esvadsir from an ally not at melee with enemies yet, so maybe they'd allow you to pick "All copies of the given rune on any number of targets you choose," instead, but it would still help reduce spam.
There's also the option of limiting runes to one weapon rune per weapon, one creature rune per creature, etc, which would make it so changing the wording of invoke isn't needed. But I suspect given invoke reads as "you utter the name of one or more of your runes within 30 feet," that it was intended to be a little less precise than what the wording of "you can invoke any number of runes with a single invoke rune action" is currently being taken as meaning.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lower them to d4
Limit invoke to once per round
Be careful on the new runes you introduce
It's important to note that while the burst is too high, the dpr isn't far off once you remove the multiple invokes a round.
I think the d6s are fine still, as long as you get rid of the ability to do the highest bursts.
Limiting things to fort saves already helps on not overwhelming the most durable enemies, so if we were changing to d4s, I might want to have more save options with other damage types. And/or d6 for commonly resisted elements like fire, d4 for more uncommon damage types and alternate saves types, like spirit damage on a will save.
The big thing is either limiting how many of the damaging runes you can use in the first place at a time or limiting the number of times you can invoke runes on a turn. One or the other, but maybe not both.
I personally prefer being able to invoke more often but not being able to stack things up as high without more creativity, though. Along with the future proofing from the "one rune per slot" rule. The short range on invokes, especially in the first half of the level progression means there could easily be times when you'd want to invoke, stride, and invoke on another rune a different ally has on them. Especially for things like homecoming runes to pull back people out of sticky situations.
Or homecoming invoke, then invoke an AOE damaging rune now that the ally isn't in the area of effect. Or invoke whetstone rune on the fighter who charged in, then invoke homecoming when you see an enemy you expected to be dead saved for half and the damage rolled low.
I just don't want to remove options that can be used creatively if there are other ways to limit the more problematic elements.
I'm with you on the last paragraph but we may differ on our ideas of creativity.
Main reason I didn't want multiple invokes is because I honestly don't see a way to balance their current action economy with them without absolutely butchering rune damage. The class can do too much with action compression and etchings for it to stay i believe.
But I view invoking once a round as improving creative use of turns and actions. I think with multiple invokes it just boils down to how fast you can get damage runes in place to invoke as much as possible.
Maybe you see something I don't though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The main thing I see as a problem with limiting invokes is that a lot of people will want runes with good emergency invoke effects etched on allies if they aren't trying to just damage burst the enemies turn one and sacrificing all defense to do so. But parties spread out a good bit if you give them room and a few turns with enemies in multiple directions - very few parties are actually good at sticking together and following the plan during combat.
The base invoke range of 30 feet is short enough that outside of small dungeon rooms, it's entirely likely that you might want to get an invoke off on two allies who are far enough away that you can't hit both of them with one invoke until level 12 with the 60 foot invocation range boost.
Maybe you have a homecoming rune on your wizard for if they get caught out of position, and an insulation rune on your fighter who loves charging the big dangerous stuff and the armies of minions alike, and the wizard's gotten themselves in a pickle where they'll be downed next turn after you in initiative, and the fighter's been grappled by an enemy who's decided they can get rid of the painful target by throwing them off a cliff next turn, and the fighter's attempt to escape already failed.
So you need to free your fighter from the grapple with invoking the insulation rune, which will also slap some extra damage on the grappler, and then move and teleport the wizard to behind you. You thus need to invoke, stride, and invoke.
That won't be possible with just the single invoke until level 12 if the two are more than 12 squares on an average map apart. Which, yes, is a fairly good distance, but my group regularly has a mix of more open, large maps with smaller more confined indoors ones, and I've very much seen someone run 100 feet away from the party to try to kill an enemy mage or something.
---
Part of what I'm trying to do is keep in mind the non damage options that the runesmith wants to have, and how they'd be impacted by the attempts to balance out the blasting potential down.
What's the main issue with more than one invoke in a round if you assume the limitation of no duplication runes / rune slots? I'd assume it would be with having two to three allies all having Esvadir etched on their weapons and come in after you traced some runes the previous round, then detonating each Esvadir rune on a different action to stack them all together? Maybe with a body tattooed sun-Atryl with WFF to let you invoke it twice as well despite the limit of 1 rune per slot per creature?
...Okay, 10d6 per rank on round 2 in a small AOE from one person is still pretty concerning if the party had any way to get enemies to cluster or get to the healers/mages of an enemy formation. Even if it takes coordination and bunching up the party to be similarly clustered for AOE retaliations.
But I still feel the solution isn't going to be restricting invoke to once per round. Maybe it actually should be "all copies of the spoken rune (that you created) in invoke range are triggered?" That encourages diversification of what runes you're etching before going into the fight, or waiting for just the right moment and spreading the burst out a lot more to a wider area but lower damage surprise for the enemies.
And it would give remote detonation a very strong niche for setting off runes more selectively in addition to being able to set them off at a greater range when used.
-And- it could possibly be another good reason to use some of the diacritic runes. If "Sun-Zohk" doesn't get set off at the same time as "Zohk" and "Zohk" isn't set off by you invoking "Sun-Zohk," for instance, then though the option to do both at once is still there on the standard invoke option, Diacritic runes could be used to further control activations on etched runes and the like. It would even give "Ur-" a purpose if "Ur-Esvadir" doesn't have to be invoked at the same time as another "Esvadir" rune... but all of that at the cost of extra Etched Rune slots out of your very limited number of those.
I actually view your description of a problem, as good game design. You're having to seriously weigh your rune decisions and having to devote both actions and resources to both. You can do great damage OR save your friends, not both.
But multiple invokes to me seems more of a, for lack of a better term, wanting your cake and eat it too (always hated that but it's the best I got)
I actually view your description of a problem, as good game design. You're having to seriously weigh your rune decisions and having to devote both actions and resources to both. You can do great damage OR save your friends, not both.
But multiple invokes to me seems more of a, for lack of a better term, wanting your cake and eat it too (always hated that but it's the best I got)
I was a bit more hoping for thoughts on the idea of alternatives I presented rather than "Sounds greedy. Extra restrictions on when you can use actions are good game design." I accept that there are times where restricting when something can be done is the right answer, but before deciding on that, exploring other options and seeing which seem to fit the desired outcome might be more helpful.
So, my first thought was that the wording of invoke mentions "you utter the name of one or more of your runes," and above the actual action's text, in "invoking runes" it again says "you can pronounce the true name of a rune you have applied..." So this could lead well to the idea that any identical runes are always set off together if they're in range. Your invoke range detonates any whetstone runes all at once if you detonate a single whetstone rune, for instance.
This completely removes the ability to spam a given rune multiple times in a turn outside of doubling up on a single rune via "Sun-" as a Diacritic. Combining this with "one slot, one rune" would mean that you shouldn't be able to have a single invoke have more than two runes deal damage to a single target without En- Diacritics at level 9, which can't have Sun- on them as well.
It also puts some of a nerf to W,FF as you can't spam invoke on several copies of En- Diacritic runes transposed by W,FF if they all go off at once with the damage unable to stack due to the "no duplicate rune effects in the same action" rule. W,FF is still strong with a Sun- rune combo, but is 1/day rather than per encounter, unlike most of the other problem items, but even that is less bad with this.
Thoughts? Further problems I haven't thought of? Other suggestions for possible fixes or changes?