[citansdnd] Re: unarmed strike
- From: Diana Jakobs <diana.c.jakobs@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: citansdnd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:01:55 -0800
Level 11 Elite... that is just... scary.
Even level 11 minions can kick your butt if you can't hit them. I've seen
encounters where high level (and they weren't level +8) minions were the
scariest things on the field.
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:41 PM, <marbleminotaur@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> "On the reward, I've been thinking, why don't we do exactly what the
> divine boons section suggests, rather than try to tweak things and give out
> feat-like things? What if, due to the training, we get built in magic items
> as boons like the section suggests, probably items of our choice. We have
> been incorporating all sorts of things into our training, so, we can justify
> most setups. At this level, we should have roughly 2-3 magic items each,
> since we aren't getting them via other methods, why don't we just cover them
> like the book suggests?"
>
> *THANK YOU. This is exactly what I've been trying to say this entire time.
> It's the only way to be absoutely sure we're not shooting ourselves in the
> foot here. There's a reason why 4th Ed is structured so rigidly, and it's
> because doing stuff like this BROKE THE PREVIOUS SYSTEM. They're trying
> their damndest to avoid as many possibilities to break the game as seen
> especially by the huge amounts of errata they produce every MONTH.
> Seriously, the more I play 4th Ed the more I don't think I ever want to go
> back to 3.5 because of how broken the damn thing was by its very nature.*
>
>
> "There is no obvious reason why there shouldn't be a feat to do exactly the
> same thing for
> the Unarmed Strike weapon, or for Unarmed weapons generally. (There
> actually is an
> Unarmed weapon - the Spiked Gauntlet.) I suggest Versatile Duelist or
> Longsword Finesse
> as a model. Note the difference in how they treat Sneak Attack."
>
> *Thing is, I am 100% certain that this WILL exist. If not in Player's
> Handbook 3, then in Psionic Power. Like I've said before, once PHB3 is in
> our hands, every single one of these issues will not only be addressed, but
> completely settled. It's just one more month until its release. If we go
> crazy with making stuff up, chances are pretty high we'll wind up having to
> backpedal like crazy once the official rules on Monks are here. I'd be
> willing to bet hard money that the Monk Multiclass Feat will accomplish
> everything Casey has been trying to do for us, and would make it a much more
> viable option to take once we find out what it bestows on a character.*
> **
> *"*One of our allies is level 11? Oh... dear... That is an order of
> magnitude of XP budget above us, we are just not going to be hitting the bad
> guys if they are that far above us. Even if they have the level adjustment
> spred out to adjust for the XP levels, that will be a lot of high level guys
> pounding on us. The maximum amount an enemy can be above the party in an
> encounter is (and please do double check this, I am without my books at the
> moment,) is level +7, and that is kind of discouraged, especially if it
> crossed the tier boundary. A lot of crazy stuff comes into play once you
> hit paragon, if any of the enemies are level 11, we probably wouldn't be
> able to take him even with all our powers functional. I think their
> defenses will be, what, +4 compared to what we normally hit?"
>
> *That's not all, the Level 11 is an ELITE. On top of that we have 18 Level
> 4 NPCs coming along with him. I've found where it mentions the enemy's
> level being seven levels higher or more than four levels lower than the
> party and the wording strongly suggests to never ever do this, because it's
> too hard or too easy. All number work strongly suggests that the highest a
> monster should be above the party is a maximum of only four levels higher or
> a minimum of four levels lower. I've done the math, and since both teams
> have 27 players... Yeah, we're basically boned. The only way we could
> possibly win is if the 27 opponents are all Minions, and even then we'd only
> get at most 150 Exp for our troubles. But that's only if they were all Level
> 11.*
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Diana Jakobs <diana.c.jakobs@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: citansdnd@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent: Tue, Feb 23, 2010 10:23 am
> Subject: [citansdnd] Re: unarmed strike
>
> Simply my $0.02...
>
> Even if the martial powers are allowed via the unarmed strike rule, the no
> magic rule is going to be what hurts us. Half the sorcerer/barbarian's and
> Tartarus's powers are gone, all of the invoker's and the shaman's are just
> shut down. Plus, the loss of the weapons is going to hurt us a bit,
> Tartarus for example is very specifically built to take advantage of reach,
> he would probably not be a Tempest fighter if he didn't have the spiked
> chain, it is that way so he can easily mark two guys a turn with an at will.
>
> On the reward, I've been thinking, why don't we do exactly what the divine
> boons section suggests, rather than try to tweak things and give out
> feat-like things? What if, due to the training, we get built in magic items
> as boons like the section suggests, probably items of our choice. We have
> been incorporating all sorts of things into our training, so, we can justify
> most setups. At this level, we should have roughly 2-3 magic items each,
> since we aren't getting them via other methods, why don't we just cover them
> like the book suggests?
>
> I do like the idea of a interesting bonus for the training, I'd look at
> what artifacts give as a guide honestly, some of them, when they head off
> and if they are well attuned to you, will give a simple stat bonus. What
> about a +2 to our choice of strength or constitution? It fits the training,
> and, since we can pick which one it goes into, it will give us all +1 to
> fort if we put it in our highest Str/Con stat.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 1:25 AM, <warrl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> I've decided the minotaur is partly right: Unarmed Strike should NOT count
>> as a light blade
>> or a two-handed weapon or any other sort of weapon except "unarmed".
>>
>> However, he also wants to NOT take away powers - and to manage that, the
>> rogue Assad
>> has to be able to use Unarmed Strike with powers that explicitly require
>> light blades, and the
>> barbarian - Thom? - has to be able to use Unarmed Strike with powers that
>> explicitly require
>> two-handed weapons.
>>
>> (Berrian is okay as is, and I think Tartarus is too. They are the two
>> hybrid Tempest fighters. I
>> can't comment on anyone else's weapon powers, or on non-weapon powers..)
>>
>> Fortunately, he's also partly mistaken. Yes, there is a class-build option
>> for the rogue to be
>> able to use something other than a light blade with all his
>> light-blade-specific powers and
>> with Sneak Attack. However, there are also four standard feats and two
>> multiclass-weapon
>> feats - three if you count Spiked Chain Training - that do the same thing
>> with various
>> weapons/groups.
>>
>> Note that this does NOT mean the rogue can apply light-blade-enhancing
>> FEATS to those
>> weapons. (Except Spiked Chain Training: with this feat, the chain IS a
>> light blade.)
>>
>> There is no obvious reason why there shouldn't be a feat to do exactly the
>> same thing for
>> the Unarmed Strike weapon, or for Unarmed weapons generally. (There
>> actually is an
>> Unarmed weapon - the Spiked Gauntlet.) I suggest Versatile Duelist or
>> Longsword Finesse
>> as a model. Note the difference in how they treat Sneak Attack.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure there is no similar feat for using one-handed weapons with
>> two-handed
>> powers or class features. But we can create such a feat specifically for
>> Unarmed Strike,
>> modeled after the rogue feats. I think it and the rogue Unarmed Strike
>> feat should be
>> mutually exclusive.
>>
>> If anyone else needs a comparable feat to allow the use of Unarmed Strike
>> with their
>> weapon powers and weapon-related class features, we should do that too.
>>
>> (Oh, and magic items: I know that weapons & armor are strictly out for the
>> game, but please
>> can we wear our other magic items? Berrian thinks his Badge of the
>> Berserker would be
>> really useful.)
>>
>> On the other stuff: I'm comfortable either way on the fortitude bonus
>> issue. I think the
>> across-the-board +1 is a slightly better fit for the level but the +2
>> fortitude bonus fits the
>> story better.
>>
>> And for the selective strength bonus, I like Weapon Expertise/Focus feats
>> better but the
>> enhancement bonus is a decent compromise too.
>>
>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
