Difference between revisions of "Talk:I Have a Punning Clan (3.5e Feat)"
From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
m (derp) |
|||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
::::::::::::I thought it was only attack rolls. Spending a swift action to lower their damage by 1 is worthless, attack rolls by 1 is insignificant, but saving throws is acceptable for fighter level. The wording could be improved to explicitly state what kind of rolls are affected (attack rolls, skill checks, damage rolls, and saving throws). --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC) | ::::::::::::I thought it was only attack rolls. Spending a swift action to lower their damage by 1 is worthless, attack rolls by 1 is insignificant, but saving throws is acceptable for fighter level. The wording could be improved to explicitly state what kind of rolls are affected (attack rolls, skill checks, damage rolls, and saving throws). --[[User:Aarnott|Aarnott]] 16:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
| + | :::::::::::::All rols, hence the wording "rolls" instead of naming specific kinds.--Change=Chaos. Period. [[User:Spazalicious Chaos| SC]] 05:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 05:47, 20 July 2011
I'm always a fan of a good pun. Also, feels balanced. --Havvy 05:58, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
- This is an extreme example, but this could get out of hand in combination with Leadership-style feats, even (and particularly) the adjusted ones that only grant followers. Suddenly you have over a dozen allies giving cumulative penalties to an opponent, which since it doesn't say otherwise I can only presume can go to negatives. That last bit was intended to be sarcastic, but I think that explains it about right. You could probably fix it by imposing a CR minimum on the allies to make their taunt effective. The BBEG shouldn't be worrying about the taunts of a mook who he can kill with almost no effort. - TG Cid 17:17, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
- I think that's a misread Cid. Each additional guy contributing looks like they provide an additional -1 on a different roll, and it doesn't appear that you can stack them at all. So you could load someone up with a few hundred -1s, but they would each apply to a different roll and any unused at the end of the round are simply wasted. So you could give a guy -1 to all of his rolls with a sufficiently large retinue, but that's not all that big of a deal. - Tarkisflux Talk 17:30, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
- Feels weak even for fighter level. I'd make it a -2 penalty. Or make the feat monk level. Spending a swift action for -1 per enemy attack from a single enemy just feels worthless. Heck, dodge gives +1 AC against all the attacks from a single target and dodge is probably monk level. --Aarnott 18:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- It's strength is messured by your friends. If a typical party has four members, that is three penalized rolls right there. Hirelings are available at 1rst level, thus you can start penalizing even more rolls if you have enough coin. Once Leadership and talking familiars get into the mix, the number of penalized rolls gos to "batshit insane". However, the penalty itself is a 5% decrease in effectiveness for most rolls, though I purposely left "penalized rolls" ambiguous enough that theoretically you can penalize damage as well. Thus, fighter unless you have a really small group or play by yourself.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 23:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- Ammendum: I did some quick math- the "buy your own equipment" method of character creation allows for the hiring of a small unit ('bout 25 or so) mercenaries for just about all classes except for monk and druid. Good luck keeping them longer than a day, but that is still 25+party penlized rolls per round. If the penalty was -2, that would jump this feat to rogue level, possibly wizard. Are you okay with this?--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 23:20, 18 July 2011 (UTC) PS, sorry for double posting...
- Feels weak even for fighter level. I'd make it a -2 penalty. Or make the feat monk level. Spending a swift action for -1 per enemy attack from a single enemy just feels worthless. Heck, dodge gives +1 AC against all the attacks from a single target and dodge is probably monk level. --Aarnott 18:50, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
- -2 is pretty much equivalent to the shaken condition. Is making your target shaken equivalent to a rogue level feat? --Havvy 01:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- If you can apply it to all rolls like this feat allows, yes. And it can hit all rolls, including saves, skill checks, and arguably damage.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 02:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- -2 is pretty much equivalent to the shaken condition. Is making your target shaken equivalent to a rogue level feat? --Havvy 01:06, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- Except being shaken doesn't require any further action upkeep on your part. With this, you and your buddies have to keep using your swift actions to force him to take a measly -1 on one roll for each buddy each turn, since they don't carry over. It amounts to nothing more than wasted actions if the enemy decides to only make one roll per turn, otherwise you have to force him into it by using even more actions to make him roll for stuff. All in all, it's too much effort for not enough gain, especially if you are going to go the trouble of getting hirelings (who will just be promptly butchered in all likelyhood). - TG Cid 03:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- Fortunately, this is only fighter, not rogue. I agree with you, TG Cid, and I want to keep this fighter, thus no pain increase unless a compelling reason is brough forth.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 03:20, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- Except being shaken doesn't require any further action upkeep on your part. With this, you and your buddies have to keep using your swift actions to force him to take a measly -1 on one roll for each buddy each turn, since they don't carry over. It amounts to nothing more than wasted actions if the enemy decides to only make one roll per turn, otherwise you have to force him into it by using even more actions to make him roll for stuff. All in all, it's too much effort for not enough gain, especially if you are going to go the trouble of getting hirelings (who will just be promptly butchered in all likelyhood). - TG Cid 03:03, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- I thought it was only attack rolls. Spending a swift action to lower their damage by 1 is worthless, attack rolls by 1 is insignificant, but saving throws is acceptable for fighter level. The wording could be improved to explicitly state what kind of rolls are affected (attack rolls, skill checks, damage rolls, and saving throws). --Aarnott 16:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
- All rols, hence the wording "rolls" instead of naming specific kinds.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 05:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
- I thought it was only attack rolls. Spending a swift action to lower their damage by 1 is worthless, attack rolls by 1 is insignificant, but saving throws is acceptable for fighter level. The wording could be improved to explicitly state what kind of rolls are affected (attack rolls, skill checks, damage rolls, and saving throws). --Aarnott 16:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
