Community

Siberys wrote:

Linguist and the Marks don't match up in your analogy. Linguist doesn't mechanically help any class; combat wise, it's equally subpar for all classes. The Marks, however, aren't; some classes benefit fully from the combat benefits, while others don't.

Um... isn't that exactly what I said?

smug]So the Mark of Warding as shown is clearly more useful to a character with a marking ability than any other character. But it's not entirely useless to another character wrote:

So the Mark of Warding as shown is clearly more useful to a character with a marking ability than any other character. But it's not entirely useless to another character; it's simply a social benefit as opposed to a combat benefit.

As shown, the Mark of Warding is better for a fighter than it is for a warlock, because the fighter benefits from all three aspects of the feat. For the fighter it's a sure investment with a everyday use. For the warlock, it's like taking Linguist - something with no combat value and uncertain secondary value, possibly extremely useful and possibly not. I was responding specifically to the question of why the warlock would ever take the feat, and simply observing that while it's not AS good, there are benefits to the feat beyond that marking enhancement.

Would it be preferable for all dragonmarks to support all character types fully and equally? Perhaps. But I see Hellcow's earlier point about the 3E Mark of Healing. It's designed to be equally useful to all character types: cure light wounds once per day. Who can't use that? Well, actual healers, when it comes down to it. One more CLW doesn't much for a cleric. So I understand the goal of wanting Jorasco HEALERS to have an edge over other healers - as opposed to making it a house of fighters and rogues who can heal once per day. Of saying "Jorasco and Ghallanda should have the best healers; Deneith and Kundarak focus on defense; Phiarlan and Thuranni deal with striking from the shadows" and so on. If you want to be a Jorasco fighter, get your healing by being a paladin, multiclassing to heal or what have you - but given how many ways there are for a character to do this already, I'm fine with the idea of the Mark of Healing enhancing healing powers instead of essentially mirroring cleric multiclassing.

Essentially, we already have Leader Multiclassing to allow characters of other classes to heal a little if they want; I'm happy to have the Mark of Healing be something that improves your preexisting healing abilities, instead of just tacking on one more way to heal a little.

Siberys wrote:

For example, If the Mark of Storm increases lightning damage, then one of my favorite archetypes ('Marked Airship Captain Rogue) is less enticing because of the need for a weapon that deals lightning damage; I wanted a duelist weapon! It's great for swordmages and sorcerers, though.

First, the Mark of Storm doesn't increase lightning damage; it adds a secondary effect to powers that deal lightning or thunder damage. Set that aside though. The image of the Lyrandar airship captain is a great one. But in 4E specifically, why would you make that character a rogue? Things that define a rogue include sneak attack damage and training in Thievery and Stealth. Why are any of these three things particularly logical for a Lyrandar captain? On the other hand, a Storm Sorcerer makes an AWESOME airship captain. You're still lightly armored, still capable of being athletic and quick, but the wind shields you and buffets your foes, and you can ride its currents; you're protected from the effects of thunder and lightning; and you can strike your opponent with lightning as an at-will effect. Get Sorcererous Blade Channeling and you can channel the storm through your blade. Sure, it's a dagger instead of a rapier. But seriously - considering that you're never USING it as a dagger, but rather as a vessel for those other powers, does it really MATTER that it's a dagger? I don't know about you, but if my player said "Hey, mechanically this has to be a dagger, but cosmetically do you mind if I make it a rapier? I'm never actually using it as a weapon." - I'd be happy to do it.

I guess my point is this: the storm sorcerer or swordmage will feel more like a Lyrandar heir - someone wielding the power of storm and wind against their enemies - then a fighter or rogue ever will. A single feat won't somehow make the fighter feel more stormlord-y than that sorcerer. So I'm fine with the designers looking at the game and saying "If you're trying to make a story about a Lyrandar heir in 4E, you'll be picking a character who innately harnesses the power of the storm and can use them frequently. So what we'll do is make the Lyrandar heir BETTER at channeling lightning than the random dragonborn sorcerer... to emphasize that they are the true masters of the Storm." Give Jorasco HEALERS an edge, Lyrandar wielders of storm power an edge, etc... because supposedly these are the things that have allowed the houses to prosper. Jorasco isn't known for its soldiers... so why make the mark as good for fighters as it is for healers?

Though with that said, Hellcow implied that there are marks that don't have a role bias, so we'll see.

Personally, I really hope that there's more to the ritual thing that just "You can use these preexisting rituals just like everyone else". The Kundarak "Fluid Funds" is what gives me hope If each house has a few UNIQUE rituals, then that gives the houses a unique service to the world and DOES give the PCs some minor concrete benefit even if the combat benefit doesn't match... so even if you're a class that has Ritual Caster as a bonus feat, by taking the mark you gain access to feats you couldn't learn any other way.

But at the moment, we really know next to nothing. I suppose we'll find out the truth in a few weeks.

Smug wrote:

First, the Mark of Storm doesn't increase lightning damage; it adds a secondary effect to powers that deal lightning or thunder damage. Set that aside though. The image of the Lyrandar airship captain is a great one. But in 4E specifically, why would you make that character a rogue? Things that define a rogue include sneak attack damage and training in Thievery and Stealth.

Because Swashbuckler-y Airship Captains are awesome ? A rapier does not a swashbuckler make: the class powers make the difference. Sure, you can reflavor, but only up to a limit.

a Storm Sorcerer makes an AWESOME airship captain.

I do agree with that.