D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium
Seriously, did this need to be said?Really?
Reflavoring is difficult to do because the D&DI Character Builder makes it illegal.It is absolutely impossible to rename the class powers, and less possible to rewrite their flavor texts.That means, the character sheet that you actually have, the one you must read, consult, and must refer to by name when the DM or other players have any questions about the character or a particular power - the character names and descriptions that you must think in when actually playing a reallife game - that character has no flavor options.Looking at a printed sheet that says the exact opposite of what you want it to say erodes efforts at sustaining alternate narratives. Personalizing your character is like running up an escalator that is going down at a faster speed.A large section of the CB subscribers have been calling for the CB to refluff for years now. The designers know people want it. It doesnt seem hard to do - just fill in your own text box and display it. Done. Yet it hasnt happened yet.They did it for items, yet for some reason, absolutely refuse to do it for anything that actually relates to your character concept. Why?I hope the CB is about to make rewriting powers legal - soon - either to support the 'core' Dragon article or else the article is effectively announcing a design decision.It should have happened two years ago. Im glad, it is happening now. If it is happening now.
Wizards, shave and a haircut
Seriously, did this need to be said?Really?It does. I have a (former) DM I'm pointing this article out to as we speak. People who might be used to other games or previous editions of D&D might not understand this concept.
RC Favor Text: The next entry inan adventurer powers description, in italic, briefly describe what the power does, from the perspective of the character. This material helps narrate what the power is doing in the game world. Players are free to invent their own descriptions of powers, sprinkling them with details specific to their adventurers or the campaign setting.
I don't think I'm alone in wanting this article incorporated into the character builder in the form of being able to edit the names and flavor text of powers and feats.
Yeah. Also, in case the PHB didn't make it clear enough to you, and this Dragon article still has you scratching your head, you can reflavor your powers.
Now I was under the impression that radiant and necrotic were not inherently good nor evil. So while evil clerics might move towards getting powers fueled with necrosis, their radiance is still simply the strength of his resolve for an evil deity and thus they continuing to be able to assert his dominance, in damage, against undead. This is where some reflavoring might come in to adjust names and flavor text to be more selfish or malicious aligned though.
So while evil clerics might move towards getting powers fueled with necrosis, their radiance is still simply the strength of his resolve for an evil deity and thus they continuing to be able to assert his dominance, in damage, against undead. This is where some reflavoring might come in to adjust names and flavor text to be more selfish or malicious aligned though.
I always simplified as: Necrotic damage is channeling energy from the Shadowfell, and radiant is channeling energy from the Astral sea. Since the Astral Sea is the home plane of most (all?) gods, its easy for divine classes to channel energy from there. Nothing about good or evil energy.
[<()>]Proud Brazilian. Typos are free bonuses.
I'm hoping that the main reason why they have relased an article about refluffing powers is precisely because they intend to incorporate it into the Builder. It has been a long time in coming.
Really hoping you're right. Somebody earlier mentioned the disconnect that happens when you have to use a character sheet full of "official" stuff but trying to roleplay something else. I do that fairly often, and even when I manage to convince my group that I'm playing a necromancer, the word "shaman" keeps screaming up at me from my sheet. Drives me crazy.
My necromancer is a psion. He has control of a few spectral undead which he uses to do his bidding, though he tends to fall back on three of them. He can channel energy to briefly empower them, and he also has a couple of other ghosts which he barely controls and can only call upon rarely.(I got a tiefling necromancer mini and had to make a character to use it. The reflavoring works fairly well, though I sometimes slip and fall back into psionic speak.)
There is a mental gap between knowing you can change the fluff text of a power and knowing you can completely rechristen it and make it your own. I've been playing for years but until 4e I never made the leap to customizing my powers to fit my character.
Sorry David, but this article does not only treat with Refulffing. Reflavoring is not taking Cloud of Steel, turning it into some Cloud of Flame dealing Fire damage. This is redesigning sorry. There are Feat that will benefit Powers called Cloud of Steel and need to stay named as is and Fire damage is a considerable change having an impact on the game and that does not simply change the flavor of it. Ask a Troll... Changing the name to a limit could be okay if it involves nothing. Dont take Dual Strike and call it Cleave thinking it will now be affected by Feats benefiting Cleave for exemple. As long as it remains first and foremost Dual Strike named differently okay.
I agreed. Renaming powers to gain feats or side benefits would be breaking reflavouring.
Weapon power damage is very different though than energy damage in 4e. IF weapon damage were an energy/damage type ("My longsword strike deals 12 weapon damage") it might be more permissible to change that.
However, dropping into my comfortable role as Devil's advocate, currently nothing in the game resists "weapon damage" as it is essentially untyped. Every other damage type can be resisted, so the theoretical cloud of flame would be more useful in a troll fight but become less useful in a red dragon or fire elemental fight. And as long as the player isn't conveniently reflavouring their powers to match the current situation is that a problem?
But, if you're changing energy damage to energy ray of frost to ray of acid does it break the game?
4e can be a little power heavy. Unlike earlier editions they can't just make a single definitive fire power or acid spell and just let multiple classes have access to that power. Instead you need a power for each and every class, which takes-up a lot of space in a book for what would amount to duplicate mechanics.
Wizards and the like are poorer examples of this, as they have so many powers already. You can ussually find something that fits. Classes with fewer powers and less variety (seeker, runepriest) can really benefit from creatively describing their powers and very, very careful customization (with DM approval).
Let me ask, Why making a Feat like Arcane Admixture if anyone can modify powers keyword and damage type ?
Well, that feat lets you add a second keyword and damage type making it much more likely to bypass resistance. If you're dealing fire and cold you're prepared for anything (and still qualify for frost cheese feats). There's nothing quite as fun as fireballing elder red dragons. Oh, the look on their faces...
One of the very few house rules I have set for my group is one i got from Mike Mearls, in that, a player can rip out any keywords and replace them when they take the spell.So if I have an Ice Mage in my party, and they have ray of frost, and they want to also take Magic Icicle (Magic Missile), I have no issue with that. The character history, background and RP is stronger for it.It's possible it could be abused with feats like Bitter Cold. (When you hit a creature with a cold wizard power, that creature also takes a –2 penalty to its Fortitude until the end of your next turn.). But then, you could take Chilling Cloud and still have all your At-wills be cold based by the book, so I don't see anything broken. It's also possible that I could throw the group up against a white dragon, and watch the wizard scramble. But he would know the risks if he specialized so much.As long as it isn't constantly being changed from Magic Icicle to Magic Flame Missile to Magic Acid Bolt before each different dragon fight, I'm ok with it.Surprisingly, at level 10 now, and no one has reflavored a single power.But changing keywords absolutely requires DM approval. However, If a player wants to change Color Spray so instead of magic light, it's super shiny glitter that still dazes the opponents (without changing anything mechanically), that can be done by anyone, no questions asked. (Well a few, but we won't get into that.)And if WotC is reading this, why put out this article now when the "Upgraded" character Builder can't reflavor or refluff or rename?I felt a little like "open wound, insert salt".
I should ask CharOp. I was under the impression Arcane Admixture was the easiest way to get a desired damage type. Apart from Magic Items. Probably the cheapest and most reliable way too...Frost Cheese and or Radiant Mafia becomes a LOT easier to pick up on if you can just reflavor a Power to say... deal Cold or Radiant damage, without any major trick. It would not make the Feat obselete, only certain powers can get this treatement but it would loose some of its shine i guess. What do you guys think ?
I agree. Reflavoring I have an issue with, changing keywords makes some sense. If the article had been more on changing keywords, I might have not of had an issue.
Now I was under the impression that radiant and necrotic were not inherently good nor evil.
Seriously, did this need to be said?Really?It does. I have a (former) DM I'm pointing this article out to as we speak. People who might be used to other games or previous editions of D&D might not understand this concept.I might also add that it's nice to get articles that aren't "crunch" or "fluff" in Dragon. Features like this are a cool addition to the magazines.
Seriously, did this need to be said?Really?Yes, yes it did.Everybody else in my group takes fluff text as binding, written in stone, invariable, cannot be changed EVAR, and I know they aren't the only ones.Is it legal to print these articles? I want to make sure everybody reads it.