Talk:Energy Trail (3.5e Equipment)

Pricing & Design

I have concerns with both pricing and design on this enhancement. The design space just isn't there for a +2 enhancement cost to do more than just +2d6 energy damage. If you want to keep the cost the same and have extra features, the damage is going to need to drop a little.

The big problem though is the trail. So, it's a large area of denial vs no save damage. This approach makes it inherently unfun for melee characters who now need to adjust their movement accordingly to what may be an entire array of lines all extending from the archer. The DM gets discouraged from using big monsters since it becomes unavoidable for them to end up crossing over multiple of these just to do anything, even in the air. DMs also now need to track these lines after every attack, every round, in every angle. 3 squares to your left, 6 squares up, that's a line effect now. That sounds awful to track every single round. Meanwhile, the fighter has to dodge through all this stuff around where he's working, and the rogue as trouble getting in for a flank and the cleric can't get to people to touch for buffs and healing because there's automatic damage in the way.

Given that there are abilities that will let characters throw things around corners, or arch shots or do other things with their projectiles and ammunition that aren't "lines", you're going to end up with some weirdness there as well.

I cannot recommend the lingering trail effect on an enhancement like this.

Off the top of my head recommendation instead of a lingering effect, have the "trail" damage any targets that would have been in the way due to soft cover or whatever. Just use the primary attack roll and the soft cover targets take just the "trail" damage if it would otherwise hit. This still has some of the problem of shooting past your allies though like the original does. The "trail" is anti-melee-teamwork in its design so that's a hurdle to overcome.

Also you have "ML" for Manifester Level listed. I imagine that's a copy goof. --Ganteka Future (talk) 20:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with the raised issues. One way to adjust it would be to decrease the damage or, better, to make the trail break the first time anyone take damage from it. I prefer it with no save as it speeds things up and characters can still avoid it by jumping/flying. --The bluez in the dungeon (talk) 21:51, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Area denial is actually the point.

The 2d6 damage is the threat, and while there is no save, its also entirely willingly to take it as you need to pass through the wall or end your turn in it, so an opponent can just step out of the line. It is entirely their choice if this is a better option or if its better for them to stand and take it because of some greater threat (maybe AoOs). There is a bit of confusion I need to clarify: the lines are on the ground. It's supposed to be a carpet bomb run, all the oil and goop lands on the floor (and thus this is ineffective against fliers). It shouldn't be any more complex than someone throwing down some Walls of Fire. Easier actually, since there are no sides.

As far as melee teamwork, that's not something I can account for. Yeah, don't take Exploding Bolts and then fire into melee with your fighter. Don't throw Fireballs at your fire vulnerable trent allies standing near your target. That's just common sense. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 09:35, 1 October 2022 (UTC)