|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:09PM
#331
|
Date Joined:
Mar 27, 2004
|
Magic, the ascension. I think GURPS had a version of it.
Not really needed here.
Terms you should know... Spoiler:
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner)
Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level.
Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds.
Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
Show
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2.
The new sub-sub-classes will be:
* Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks.
* Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank.
* Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture.
* Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things.
* Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind.
Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2).
These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing.
(Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:19PM
#332
|
Date Joined:
Apr 14, 2007
|
Yes, I know it is in Mage. But why should it have no place in D&D. It isn't something that just exists in modern-horror/fantasy it has tons and tons of normal fantasy sources that have the idea of being addicted/urges to some manner of power.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:26PM
#333
|
Date Joined:
Mar 27, 2004
|
I, as a DM, might use something like this for an actual drug that is becoming a problem for the peasants in a town. One that gives some class like powers, mostly magical or enhancement like, and causes the user to become deathly sick as it leaves the system. It would be like the drug in the Robin comic books that was being used to gain super powers.
As a power source side effect, though, it seems to be something that would hender the player and make the power source a less attractive choice.
It might be better as a class mechanic instead, perhaps one of the ill conceived classes in the later books of 3.5.
Terms you should know... Spoiler:
Show
Kit Build - A class build that is self sustaining and has mechanical differences than the normal scale. Started in Essentials. Most are call their own terms, though the Base Class should be said in front of their own terms (Like Assassin/Executioner)
Power Points - A mechanic that was wedged into the PHB3 classes (with the exception of the Monk) from the previous editions. This time, they are used to augment At Wills to be Encounters, thus eliminating the need to choose powers past 4th level.
Mage Builds - Kit builds that are schools of magic for the Wizard. A call back to the previous editions powering up of the wizard. (Wizard/Necromancer, for example) Unlike the previous kit builds, Wizards simply lose their Scribe Rituals feature and most likely still can choose powers from any build, unlike the Kit Builds.
Parcel System - A treasure distribution method that keeps adventurers poor while forcing/advising the DM to get wish lists from players. The version 2.0 rolls for treasure instead of making a list, and is incomplete because of the lack of clarity about magic item rarity.
ha ha
Show
They will Essentialize the Essentials classes, otherwise known as Essentials2.
The new sub-sub-classes will be:
* Magician. A subsubclass of Mage, the magician has two implements, wand and hat, one familiar (rabbit) and series of basic tricks.
* Crook. A subsubclass of Thief, the Crook can only use a shiv, which allows him to use his only power... Shank.
* Angry Vicar, a subsubclass of warpriest, the angry vicar has two attacks -- Shame and Lecture.
* Hitter. A subsubclass of Slayer, the Hitter hits things.
* Gatherer. A subsubclass of Hunter, it doesn't actually do anything, but pick up the stuff other players might leave behind.
Future Essentials2 classes include the Security Guard (Sentinel2), the Hexknife (Hexblade2), the Webelos (Scout2), the Gallant (Cavalier2) and the Goofus (Knight2).
These will all be detailed in the box set called Heroes of the Futile Marketing.
(Though what they should really release tomorrow is the Essentialized version of the Witchalok!)
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:37PM
#334
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2008
|
Bua? Why not, there is no statement anywhere that a Power Source couldn't be addictive. Heck, a hugely common trope in fantasy is that something like magic, supernatural ability, etc. becomes addictive and the character seeks out more and more.
I think if WoTC wanted to differentiate the Power Sources even more this be a nice way to do it.
See: Vaarsuvius from the webcomic The Order of the Stick. He currently appears to be more than a little addicted to the power of [s]three two epic-level evil spellcasters, and has yet to return the power, which he is free to do at any time (meanwhile, his soul is forfeit, but only an amount of time equivalent to the amount of time that he keeps the power of the evil wizards within him).
See also: The movie Dragonslayer. In that movie, a wizard's apprentice, Galen, gains access to an amulet containing power. However, he faces a dilemma, in which he must choose between keeping the addictive power of the amulet, or destroying it (and his master with it) t slay the dragon Vermithrax. He acts addicted to the amulet.
See also: The Lord of the Rings. Frodo is highly addicted to the corrupting power of the One Ring.
See: Star Wars. The power of the Force can be addictive, something the Dark Side exploits and tries to persuade, and the Light Side forsakes and attempts to dissuade.
Really, I could go on. But yes, magic is quite commonly shown to be addictive, as any power can be. Money, political power, authority beyond politics (i.e. cops, city guard, a teacher or principal, etc), a gun or other weapon, and so on, can all be addictive in the same manner as magical power is oft portrayed.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:41PM
#335
|
Date Joined:
Apr 14, 2007
|
I think the big difference is magic and supernatural based ones have commonly some manner of physical effect. Thus it can have a mechanical aspect in D&D. I could see a Power Source if it took on this aspect showcasing both control of it and giving in. Perhaps... Say someone who is in control is more accurate, a person giving in deals out more damage. Just one idea.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:45PM
#336
|
Date Joined:
Jun 30, 2008
|
I think the 'addictive' nature of shadow power could be a nice fluff inclusion, but I wouldn't want to be punish for choosing a Shadow class.
I love Horseshoecrabfolk.
What I love most about them is that they seem to be the one thing that we all can agree on.
See for yourself, click here!
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:49PM
#337
|
Date Joined:
Apr 14, 2007
|
I think the 'addictive' nature of shadow power could be a nice fluff inclusion, but I wouldn't want to be punish for choosing a Shadow class.
Oh I agree, which is why in my above comment both giving in and not gives a benefit. It is up to the player to decide to go along with the fluff with this, if they choose. So they can, "punish" themselves as much as they wish.
Certain Powers could benefit more from one or the other and be fluffed as such too. Same with feats too.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:50PM
#338
|
Date Joined:
Sep 12, 2008
|
I think the 'addictive' nature of shadow power could be a nice fluff inclusion, but I wouldn't want to be punish for choosing a Shadow class.
If it were mechanical, and not merely fluff, it would out of necessity require some sort of increase in raw power or in versatility in exchange for whatever mechanic encompasses the "addictive" bit. You wouldn't be punished for choosing Shadow, per se, but rather you'd be punished for the comparable increase in power gained.
ETA: Actually, it would be a good idea if the exchange were optional, either upon creation, or with each use of a power. For example, a class feature choice, where one is simply an increase in power as is standard, and the other gives you a larger power increase, but a penalty to go with. Alternatively, each power gives you a choice: cast it as normal, or cast it with an increased power level, but with a specific penalty.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 4:59PM
#339
|
Date Joined:
Apr 14, 2007
|
ETA: Actually, it would be a good idea if the exchange were optional, either upon creation, or with each use of a power. For example, a class feature choice, where one is simply an increase in power as is standard, and the other gives you a larger power increase, but a penalty to go with. Alternatively, each power gives you a choice: cast it as normal, or cast it with an increased power level, but with a specific penalty.
That be cool, if they could figure out a balanced way to do a sort of "combo system" be neat for it. In that the quicker you use these powers and frequency in a certain period of time you gain a higher increase in power but increased penalty. Nice way to showcase diving even deeper into it.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Apr 23, 2009 - 7:23PM
#340
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
If it were mechanical, and not merely fluff, it would out of necessity require some sort of increase in raw power or in versatility in exchange for whatever mechanic encompasses the "addictive" bit. You wouldn't be punished for choosing Shadow, per se, but rather you'd be punished for the comparable increase in power gained.
ETA: Actually, it would be a good idea if the exchange were optional, either upon creation, or with each use of a power. For example, a class feature choice, where one is simply an increase in power as is standard, and the other gives you a larger power increase, but a penalty to go with. Alternatively, each power gives you a choice: cast it as normal, or cast it with an increased power level, but with a specific penalty.
What about...
*Add Shadow-type to an attack and daze one target, but you grant combat advantage til end of next turn.
*+2 to damage, -2 to attack, dazed til end of next turn.
*Spend healing surge after extended rest. +1 Shadow damage per surge to all attacks until next extended rest. One target per attack.
Maybe as a channel divinity-type class feature. Or built into powers as you suggest (might be nice for multiclassing).
If it's a class feature choice and you're choosing between augmentable or just normal.........it probably shouldn't be a class feature. If Shadow power is supposed to be dark and tempting, the choice should be between how you can augment it, not whether, right? Otherwise it should just remain a feat-type option requiring Shadow power source.
|
|
|
