Difference between revisions of "Talk:Mahina's Character Sheet"
From Sourcebook Wiki
(crazy is as crazy does) |
|||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
:: I think you mean "her role playing will drive everyone else mad." And, a mage who plans on making touch attacks would not take it, for example, nor would one planning on using Tenser's Transformation, Polymorph, shape change, or any other CasterTank spells. I like to compare flaws to the feats they are flip-siding. In this case, noncombatant is reversing the polarity of Weapon Focus and, by any measurement, the flaw is far more punishing than the feat it is imitating. (-2 penalty with <b>all</b> melee attacks as compared with +1 bonus with <b>one</b> specific weapon). Really, I just look at flaws as sort of anti-feats and balance them accordingly. Whatever the penalty that goes with the feat should be about twice as punishing as the equivalent feat is rewarding. I don't see any problem with flaws being any more of an "obvious" choice than feats, especially since there's 1/10th as many of the former than the latter. [[User:Detarame|absalom]] 14:59, 12 May 2011 (EDT) | :: I think you mean "her role playing will drive everyone else mad." And, a mage who plans on making touch attacks would not take it, for example, nor would one planning on using Tenser's Transformation, Polymorph, shape change, or any other CasterTank spells. I like to compare flaws to the feats they are flip-siding. In this case, noncombatant is reversing the polarity of Weapon Focus and, by any measurement, the flaw is far more punishing than the feat it is imitating. (-2 penalty with <b>all</b> melee attacks as compared with +1 bonus with <b>one</b> specific weapon). Really, I just look at flaws as sort of anti-feats and balance them accordingly. Whatever the penalty that goes with the feat should be about twice as punishing as the equivalent feat is rewarding. I don't see any problem with flaws being any more of an "obvious" choice than feats, especially since there's 1/10th as many of the former than the latter. [[User:Detarame|absalom]] 14:59, 12 May 2011 (EDT) | ||
:: As to the Madness domain, I think it's pretty self-balancing - especially since you made her take a feat for it. Even standing alone, 90% of the time it is a *huge* albatross tied to the divine class' *best* attribute, and thus crippling her strongest saves and virtually entire skill suite, with penalties that get worse - not better - as she progresses. All for a one time auto-success and one extra spell per level on the spell lists. One of the reasons I rely so heavily on Paizo/WotC sources, FWiW, and rarely far less often second guess them, is because I trust them and I can pretty much not lose sleep over balancing them. I can't say the same for things like NetBook of Feats, Compleat Adventurer, Swords and Sorcery, etc. which tend to have feats and abilities that are WAY less thought out and so WAY more prone to abuse. At the end of the day, I think that the overuse of the concept of "broken" in magic to simply meaning "quite good" bleeds through to our metagame. Is there any flaw that is so marginal that I completely throws the game off? Probably not. But, that being said, like you I've VERY leery of allowing characters to have more than one flaw because then it's easy to go from "flavorful and slightly helpful" to "abusive and game disrupting." -gm | :: As to the Madness domain, I think it's pretty self-balancing - especially since you made her take a feat for it. Even standing alone, 90% of the time it is a *huge* albatross tied to the divine class' *best* attribute, and thus crippling her strongest saves and virtually entire skill suite, with penalties that get worse - not better - as she progresses. All for a one time auto-success and one extra spell per level on the spell lists. One of the reasons I rely so heavily on Paizo/WotC sources, FWiW, and rarely far less often second guess them, is because I trust them and I can pretty much not lose sleep over balancing them. I can't say the same for things like NetBook of Feats, Compleat Adventurer, Swords and Sorcery, etc. which tend to have feats and abilities that are WAY less thought out and so WAY more prone to abuse. At the end of the day, I think that the overuse of the concept of "broken" in magic to simply meaning "quite good" bleeds through to our metagame. Is there any flaw that is so marginal that I completely throws the game off? Probably not. But, that being said, like you I've VERY leery of allowing characters to have more than one flaw because then it's easy to go from "flavorful and slightly helpful" to "abusive and game disrupting." -gm | ||
| + | ::: She gets the Madness domain in its entirety, not just the ability. The ability I feel is almost self-balanced, but really really makes for spells that scale well forever-- no one else is throwing around 9 Entangles/day that have DC ~26 at 11th level. Yet I'm also granting access to Madness domain spells on her known spell list, so that benefit is kinda outside the norm for druids, but something she is tapping into as part of her own Alice-shares-Wonderland embrace of craziness. The flaw is there to balance out the spell access side of the equation. If it proves in-game to be too crazy (ha) detrimental, then I'll tone it down. I still have a month or so to debate on this, though, so thoughts are welcome. (I didn't make her take a default feat for Madness domain, it's the "bonus feat" in exchange for the flaw.) -[[User:Mattie|Mattie]] | ||
Revision as of 15:35, 12 May 2011
Druids are not the uber-hierarchical folks they are in other campaign settings, so there is no unified "druidic" language. They are, however, the only class able to learn the language of small mammals (sylvan), so I took the liberty of making the substitution. This is how Trav is able to Rat-a-chat-chat. -gm
- Yeah, just something I hadn't cleaned-up yet, but cool about Sylvan alternative. Hero Lab made it by default and I didn't tweak it yet. I need to get domain stuff listed and her companion on here, too. -Mattie
Is the armor Hide or Studded Leather? absalom 13:45, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
- Hide armor is what she wants. -Mattie
Also: Dazed flaw, I assume, is what is making up for her having a domain as a druid? -gm
- Yeah, this is for the Madness Domain bonus-- she will role-play the madness, too, but I wanted a tangible in-game drawback for something so outside the norm. Flaws are tough to balance... I'm also tempted to tweak noncombatant to be a little more tangible for the casters, too... Like tiny minus to init [battle hesistant] or something added to it. I dunno, seems like an obvious caster flaw, not sure which mage wouldn't take it. -Mattie
- I think you mean "her role playing will drive everyone else mad." And, a mage who plans on making touch attacks would not take it, for example, nor would one planning on using Tenser's Transformation, Polymorph, shape change, or any other CasterTank spells. I like to compare flaws to the feats they are flip-siding. In this case, noncombatant is reversing the polarity of Weapon Focus and, by any measurement, the flaw is far more punishing than the feat it is imitating. (-2 penalty with all melee attacks as compared with +1 bonus with one specific weapon). Really, I just look at flaws as sort of anti-feats and balance them accordingly. Whatever the penalty that goes with the feat should be about twice as punishing as the equivalent feat is rewarding. I don't see any problem with flaws being any more of an "obvious" choice than feats, especially since there's 1/10th as many of the former than the latter. absalom 14:59, 12 May 2011 (EDT)
- As to the Madness domain, I think it's pretty self-balancing - especially since you made her take a feat for it. Even standing alone, 90% of the time it is a *huge* albatross tied to the divine class' *best* attribute, and thus crippling her strongest saves and virtually entire skill suite, with penalties that get worse - not better - as she progresses. All for a one time auto-success and one extra spell per level on the spell lists. One of the reasons I rely so heavily on Paizo/WotC sources, FWiW, and rarely far less often second guess them, is because I trust them and I can pretty much not lose sleep over balancing them. I can't say the same for things like NetBook of Feats, Compleat Adventurer, Swords and Sorcery, etc. which tend to have feats and abilities that are WAY less thought out and so WAY more prone to abuse. At the end of the day, I think that the overuse of the concept of "broken" in magic to simply meaning "quite good" bleeds through to our metagame. Is there any flaw that is so marginal that I completely throws the game off? Probably not. But, that being said, like you I've VERY leery of allowing characters to have more than one flaw because then it's easy to go from "flavorful and slightly helpful" to "abusive and game disrupting." -gm
- She gets the Madness domain in its entirety, not just the ability. The ability I feel is almost self-balanced, but really really makes for spells that scale well forever-- no one else is throwing around 9 Entangles/day that have DC ~26 at 11th level. Yet I'm also granting access to Madness domain spells on her known spell list, so that benefit is kinda outside the norm for druids, but something she is tapping into as part of her own Alice-shares-Wonderland embrace of craziness. The flaw is there to balance out the spell access side of the equation. If it proves in-game to be too crazy (ha) detrimental, then I'll tone it down. I still have a month or so to debate on this, though, so thoughts are welcome. (I didn't make her take a default feat for Madness domain, it's the "bonus feat" in exchange for the flaw.) -Mattie
