DeadGoblins.com » Eberron » Eberron Leveling and Item Discussions

Eberron Leveling and Item Discussions

Moderators: Josh, Michael Doss.

Page: « < ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > »

Author Post
Moderator
Registered: Oct 2008
Posts: 4627
I thought Sneak Attack was once per round. Is that something that got changed?

My problem with Ambush Trick is that it is an at-will that basically gives you CA whenever you want (more or less...I know there are other conditions attached, but those I feel are nearly trivial). CA does something BEYOND the extra damage that SA has, which is a +2 to hit. I realize that SA is the hardest of the striker bonus damages to use, but it does more damage and anytime you have an opportunity to use it, it also means that you have a better chance to hit, too.

The point is for rogues to be mobile and grab CA through mobility and stealth and use that to get their SA attack on. If you are simply standing in place an entire encounter and keep getting sneak attack on a big solo, it seems like that mobility is pointless. If it was an encounter power, I wouldn't even bring it up. And yes, I realize that most of the time, it won't even come up.

I am starting to see serious issues with the Essentials material relative to original 4e. For now, if you want, you can use each of your movement at-wills once in an encounter without moving from your square. Probably will never or very rarely alter how you play, but it will make me feel better about it.
_______________
Mal Geminous - Tiefling Warlord, Scales of War
Corydimbiddle - Gnome Artificer, Points of Light
Moderator
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 1238
Josh, sneak attack got modified for the essentials builds, I believe.

I was firmly in Gary's camp, then I talked to Josh about the power. From a rules as written bit, after reviewing what's in the PHB3 about movement, it seems that moving 0 is fine. I'm not certain that the power was intended to play as:

At-Will Martial
Move Action Personal

Effect: You move up to your speed. Until the end of your turn, you gain combat advantage against enemies that are within 5 squares of you when you attack and that have none of their allies adjacent to them.

Effect: You have permanent CA while stationary against isolated enemies.

Effect: You gain perma- CA against solos. (Though this would be true of a ranged rogue, no?)

Then again, I probably wouldn't bat an eye on a level 9 ranger moving 0 during his "Attacks on the Run" Daily power.

In general, the power makes Khav better, and Sentinel less vital, so I'm against it ;) In all seriousness, I suggest either letting it play as an at-will, or using Josh's encounter limitation, and tallying up the number of times this comes up. If Khav were a ranged rogue, no one would be batting an eye at him getting CA every turn with this. If Khav's off ganking isolated foes, he's either soloing artillery that has crud OAs anyway, or not participating in focused fire. The only time this appears to be a real deal breaker is if it makes solos too easy, we've faced about 2 of those, and a ranged version of Khav would be using it every turn anyway.
_______________
Sentinel - Warforged Shielding Swordmage (Eberron)
Allena Walmond - Human Paladin of Amaunator (Forgotten Realms)
Variel - Elf Beastmaster Ranger
Thaelan the Clanless - Dwarf Protector Spirit Shaman (Dungeon Delve 4)
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2009
Posts: 3164
I think we should play it as written, in which case what Gary is doing is just fine. If we nerf powers at will, it just seems that why bother using any of the new classes? And if that is the case, why bother playing, or having any pretense at choice? If we cannot play the classes as written with the powers as written, then the DM should just choose our classes and powers, and take our turns for us. (That was sarcastic.)

More importantly, what does it really matter? The point of DnD is to have fun. If it makes Gary's fun level a bit higher to play the rogue as written, I don't see the negative. Josh, if you think it is too powerful, just adjust the battles some. I don't see the big deal.
_______________
Dungeon Master - The Dark Campaign
Sir Muurak - Mul Cavalier 14, Scales of War
Demuriath - Revenant Assassin 5, Points of Light
Kurvilis - Gnome Mage 4, Eberron
Moderator
Registered: Oct 2008
Posts: 4627
Yes, Jon, it has to be fun for everyone. Including me. I can adjust the battles, sure. Then you guys will never face minions again (so as to neuter Magic Missiles autohit) and you will only face solos as pairs.

As far as changing things, we do it all the time. If you want to play as written, no 24 hour bonus, no expertise bonus feat, teleports over chasms require a save, you have to draw your weapons at the beginning of an encounter, skill challenges are less open, etc. If we had played with the rules as written, you all would have been killed by the Mourning Haunt.

I feel concerned about the way some of the Essentials things are written. I do not mind using Essentials and 4e material together, but it is pretty obvious at this point that they have significant differences.

I feel that some of these differences are unbalanced or are not really part of the 4e-style and I have made mention of them when it comes to my attention. Magic Missile can autokill a level 30 minion when you are level 1...it may never come up, but I feel like it neuters some of the ability to give you guys a fun challenge.

The same thing goes with these at-will move actions. In PHB, I think only the Rogue even had any powers beyond level 1 that were at-will, and most of them had to do with maintaining concealment. And all of them required SOME sort of a skill check. It may never come up that Khav stands in one spot and just keeps using Ambush Trick, but I can imagine scenarios where he would. And as far as losing a move action, well, that just means he cannot move out of his square normally (which, if he is using Ambush Trick to stay in one spot, he wouldn't do anyways). Or it means he isn't using Tumbling Trick (which only makes sense if he wants to shift more than a square and/or there is an enemy adjacent to the target) or Shadow Step (which requires him to move out of his square and adjacent to a different enemy). Tumbling Trick and Shadow Step practically REQUIRE a second enemy. And he only has one minor action power, Sudden Leap, which he has never even used, so it doesn't really seem like he would be losing out on action economy there, either.

By not actually moving, and using this power, it is acting like an at-will utility that uses a move action to grant CA. Every utility that I can think of is an encounter or daily power, depending on duration and other aspects. Yes, they are minor actions, but the difference between an at-will and an encounter is bigger than the difference between a minor and a move action. I feel that making a no movement version of the power once per encounter is entirely reasonable as it will almost never come up and it will make me feel better about it in the situations where it DOES come up.
_______________
Mal Geminous - Tiefling Warlord, Scales of War
Corydimbiddle - Gnome Artificer, Points of Light
Moderator
Registered: Jul 2008
Posts: 5245
To Josh and Viktor (or any other DM who may be reading):

Pardon me for putting my opinion where it may not belong, but I'll give you my 2 cents. As a DM, I try to follow the "Say Yes" Philosophy espoused by the Dungeon Master's Guide on page 28. There is a similar section in DMG2 on page 16 called "Never Negate."

In my experience, reading, or even bending, the rules in favor of the players has always worked pretty well, at least in Scales of War.
_______________
Dungeon Master - Scales of War
Edeya - Githzerai Seeker - Points of Light
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2008
Posts: 5084
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Sneak Attack was modified for all rogues when Essentials came out, so PHB1 rogues and thieves both can Sneak Attack once per turn, instead of once per round. Great if you have a warlord arround.

As for these concerns, Josh, there are a few points you're overlooking:

1) My attacks are all basic attacks. For me to do ANYTHING cool that other classes do with their Standard action at-wills, I have to burn my move action. If I burn my move action to do Tumbling Trick (shift up to 3 and Str-mode damage to second enemy) and don't actually shift, I basically just took a Move and a Standard to do what a PHB1 fighter can do with his Standard using Cleave. I fail to see how that's overpowered. If I use Ambush Trick to attack an adjacent enemy and don't move, it's pretty similar to the regular Rogue's Duelists Flurry at-will (see end of post) in getting Sneak Attack damage when you wouldn't otherwise have CA (it does 1W less damage, and you don't have CA so no +2 to hit, but it also slides the target, lets you shift, and doesn't cost you your move action).

2) I have to use my move action powers before attacking to get their cool suff this round, the cool stuff doesn't carry over to the next round. That means if I use my Move for Ambush Trick to stab an adjacent monster with none of his friends near me, I can no longer go anywhere after I attack, and the enemy I just attacked can rip into me on his turn. This is a serious disadvantage for a squishy striker like a rogue. This is actually why I took Sudden Leap, since it's a minor so I can jump away after attacking if I decide taking a basic attack OA is better than whatever nasty thing the enemy can do on it's own turn.

3) I don't get this problems that you (and Viktor) are having with Essentials. These classes are just more options. If they were released in PHB4, I bet there wouldn't any worry about them. Psionics are just as weird as anything in Essentials, but were released in PHB3, so no one bats an eye. But if psionics came out in Heroes of the Mind's Eye instead, you'd all probably be saying they were broken.

4) Regarding solos. Even if you make Khav move with Ambush Trick, he can still use it all day against a solo. He just hangs out 5 squares away from it, moves side to side square, and hurls daggers for 1d4 instead of standing next to the solo for 1d6, but then he also is less likely to get hit. Honestly, against a solo, the only reason I would even want to be adjacent to them would be to get Sentinel CA if he isn't flanking with Lan, as I have CA at will from range anyway.

If I had known you were going to nerf everything that makes the thief work, I probably wouldn't have bothered building one in the first place. A line item veto for D&D makes it very hard on the players to know what they should do with their PC's.

User posted image
_______________
Salazar Miller - Human Sorcerer 24 - Scales of War
Azad Halim al'Zahir - Tiefling Battlemind|Paladin 7 - Points of Light
Khavak'aashta - Half-Orc Thief 5 - Eberron
Dwimmerlaik - Revenant Hexblade 2 - Dark Campaign
« Last edit by Gary on Sat Aug 20, 2011 9:50 pm. »
Moderator
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 1238
Gary, I don't think it's fair to say Josh is interested in nerfing everything that makes rogues work. He was concerned about a specific power that reduces the need for teamwork and significantly makes our lives easier (read better) when dealing with solos.

That said, Ambush Trick needs a zero move option to stay competitive with the Duelist's Flurry power. Otherwise, Ambush trick is much weaker, and Gary should train out of it...

I'd argue that we let the power play with a 0 move option and tally how often that comes up. If it's making things less fun for someone, and I mostly see potential to impact the ability of Sentinel or Lan to add usefulness to combat over most other considerations, then we can revisit things. So long as Sentinel and Lan can still be useful melee members, I'd generally vote to keep things in.

If the party has surpassed the power level of the modual and you're [Josh] forced to massively rework encounters to keep them interesting, then we have a related but different problem. If that's the case, we need to reevaluate the entire party and our expectations of play verses your willingness to burn time tweaking on an encounter. I think everyone understands how much time it takes to DM, and no one wants to make that an unfun burden for you.

As for magic missile being an auto-hit, I think that having a wizard burn a standard action to kill a minion is a very good deal for the DM almost all the time. I understand the thematic problems with minions at level 30 having 1 hitpoint and level 2 players autokilling them, but there are many powers and builds capable of dishing out autodamage. Cloud of daggers has been around since PHB1, and it does autodamage so long as the target hasn't left its square before the start of its turn. It's not as efficient a minion sweeper, but I'd argue it's a better power in general as it makes a real damage roll. Sentinel's lvl 1 daily power autopops multiple bunched minions, cleave pops minions, and there was a warlock build I saw that autokills an infinite number of bunched minions by level 12 or so. There goes your militia army. Also, there are a few at-will utility powers in 4e classic. Mystical debris is one. In essentials, utility type at-will powers are used by several classes to make their melee basic attacks on par with 4e classic at-will attacks. The Knight uses at-will minor actions to change between stances, which give his melee basic powers various abilities like slowing on a hit, or doing extra damage. In general, the knight is probably better than a fighter round by round, but it lacks daily and encounter attacks for extra oomph when needed.

Gary, regarding your 3rd bullet point. If the PHB1 rogue was balanced pre essentials, and it can now dish out striker damage on OAs and granted melee basics every time (with CA), that's a real change and increase in power. The essentials build may be perfectly balanced, but you'd have to admit the PBH1 rogue is better than before with that change. Maybe they were a weaker option before, I don't know. Maybe they are now just up to "proper" balance level if everyone is optimizing. In any case, some of their powers were designed to grant you another shot at getting in their sneak attack damage, and now they can get it more often. That said, the DM needs to employ solid tactics to avoid out-of-turn sneak attacks if the rogue is packing things like a parry/counterattack power. Essentials may be balanced (I would vote what I've seen is), 4e classic may be balanced (I would vote most of it is), but there is some potential for issues when they mix. I seen mention of some slayer builds that take advantage of the massive support in 4e classic for charging builds that are more or less off the rails.

tl;dr If everyone's having fun, let it play as a 0 move at-will CA granting option. If someone isn't having fun, DM included, we need to reevaluate things. That might be a single power, or our entire party build and power level.
_______________
Sentinel - Warforged Shielding Swordmage (Eberron)
Allena Walmond - Human Paladin of Amaunator (Forgotten Realms)
Variel - Elf Beastmaster Ranger
Thaelan the Clanless - Dwarf Protector Spirit Shaman (Dungeon Delve 4)
« Last edit by nmathew on Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:38 am. »
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2008
Posts: 5084
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Regarding out of turn Sneak Attack, apparently WotC decided allowing multiple Sneak Attacks per round was fine for the damage level for all rogues. You've always been able to get it on other turns, it just used to be only once per round. Under the old rule, the rogue could miss on his turn, and if the warlord granted him an attack while the rogue still had CA, he could get SA then. But if multiple sneak attacks in a round is a problem, well, that's not something that's changed since I started playing Khav.

The entire reason I choose to play a thief (I've played a PHB1 Str rogue to 7 already) is that I liked the entirely different approach. And if the two powers I liked best and planned to use each round are such a major problem that they're nerfed or disallowed, then I don't think I'd want to keep playing a thief. And I'm not going to play a PHB rogue. So that means another entire rebuild, and frankly, the current version is spot on with how I see him and how I view his backstory and personality reflected mechanically.
_______________
Salazar Miller - Human Sorcerer 24 - Scales of War
Azad Halim al'Zahir - Tiefling Battlemind|Paladin 7 - Points of Light
Khavak'aashta - Half-Orc Thief 5 - Eberron
Dwimmerlaik - Revenant Hexblade 2 - Dark Campaign
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2009
Posts: 3164
Kurvilis will take Phantom Echoes as his level 4 feat. However, Josh, in the CB I added orb expertise instead, since PE I have to remember anyway, while OE gives bonuses I want to show up on the char sheet.
_______________
Dungeon Master - The Dark Campaign
Sir Muurak - Mul Cavalier 14, Scales of War
Demuriath - Revenant Assassin 5, Points of Light
Kurvilis - Gnome Mage 4, Eberron
Moderator
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 1238
Gary, I'm with you. I was simply pointing out a place where Essentials changes had a real and definite impact on 4e classic power levels. It might make 4e classic rogues on par with other strikes, or it might put them a slight bit ahead. I don't know, and it's not impacting my gameplay enough to particularly care outside a desire for a generally fun game where everyone contributes. I'd bet my bottom dollar that WoTC playtested SA damage once per turn and once per round for balance in essentials. I'd also make the same bet they did the same for the PHB1 build. With respect to the PBH1 rogue, they were either wrong the first time, or wrong now (or SA damage isn't that important ;))

What two abilities are you referring to? the only possible nerf I saw discussed was Josh reducing Ambush Trick to only being a move 0 once per encounter.
_______________
Sentinel - Warforged Shielding Swordmage (Eberron)
Allena Walmond - Human Paladin of Amaunator (Forgotten Realms)
Variel - Elf Beastmaster Ranger
Thaelan the Clanless - Dwarf Protector Spirit Shaman (Dungeon Delve 4)
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2008
Posts: 5084
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Requiring shifting with Tumbling Trick could be bad too, as some enemies, like fighters, can still punish a shift, or Khav might be stuck in difficult terrain where he can't shift back and forth or near a nasty zone or ledge or something where he really doesn't want to be.

Further, all of the rogue tricks are "move/shift X and do Y." If Josh is ruling the ones I have require movement, then so would all the others, so it's not like I could even trade the two tricks I liked best for ones that avoided the issues, even if I wanted to.

As for playtesting, WotC has learned a lot since releasing PHB1 about how the rules work in the wild. The repeated wholesale changes to the stealth skill or to skill challenges are the most obvious, but half the powers in PHB1 seem like they've been errata-ed, and a bunch of class and race features as well.
_______________
Salazar Miller - Human Sorcerer 24 - Scales of War
Azad Halim al'Zahir - Tiefling Battlemind|Paladin 7 - Points of Light
Khavak'aashta - Half-Orc Thief 5 - Eberron
Dwimmerlaik - Revenant Hexblade 2 - Dark Campaign
Member
Registered: Sep 2010
Posts: 378
I think the sneak dice is a huge change, due mostly from the Essentials Rogue. They may have decided it was too limited and too weak prior to the revision, but what I fail to understand is why they didn't make this change across the board to all the striker classes who get an extra die of damage.

I know they get it every round, with some minor stipulations involved, like for a ranger, HQ must be on closest opponent, and this can leave out the tougher monsters in the early rounds, but with how easy CA is to get, the change should have been to all the striker classes.

The ranger should be able to deal HQ damage just like a rogue. IMHO, I think it makes the rogue the MOST POWERFUL class in the game. Period.
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2008
Posts: 5084
Location: Los Angeles, CA
I think Twin Strike is as much the ranger striker feature as Hunter's Quarry. Two attacks and two chances to apply static modifiers, and only needing to hit once for HQ? There's a reason just about every cheesy build on the CharOp forums is a half-elf who takes Twin Strike for his Dilettante power and makes it a true at-will in paragon. As for comparing rogues and rangers, rogues are using 1d4 or 1d6 weapons, whereas rangers are using 1d10 or 1d12 weapons, so that has to factor in as well when comparing total damage.

But now we're really off the track...
_______________
Salazar Miller - Human Sorcerer 24 - Scales of War
Azad Halim al'Zahir - Tiefling Battlemind|Paladin 7 - Points of Light
Khavak'aashta - Half-Orc Thief 5 - Eberron
Dwimmerlaik - Revenant Hexblade 2 - Dark Campaign
Moderator
Registered: Oct 2008
Posts: 4627
Personally, I don't care about the SA change, I remember us talking about it before, now, and I was simply asking on that because I didn't remember. As far as everything else goes...

First of all, the "Say Yes" thing in DMG had to do with allowing the players guide the campaign, more than discussing rules. I know that doesn't make it exclusive to that, but it is a key difference. If a player and a DM interpret a rule differently, there is no obligation on the DM's part to take the player's interpretation for all time. We have even discussed at some points that it is good policy to say "Yes, but I reserve the right to revisit this later." I have done that on many occasions.

As far as the differences between 4e and Essentials (at this point I do almost consider them separate), it seems to me that 4e is meant to be more tactical in nature and Essentials is meant to be quicker and easier. It's quicker to build characters and easier to play. This does not inherently make the PCs more powerful. However, when the two systems are MIXED, there are weird synergies that occur. For instance, there are a lot of feats and powers that have to do with MBAs. Most classes (before Essentials) don't have great MBAs, or they require a feat to use it as such. In Essentials, I think (I am not sure, though) that most classes have good MBAs. If you use Essentials only material, it is not a problem. If you use 4e material, it can make a PC MUCH more powerful than intended.

In addition, WotC has nerfed HUGE swathes of the game, including MC Paragon Paths, using an Ability modifier to boost an attack roll, and killing THP stacking for certain classes. In addition, they have improved many things, such as adding an Ability choice for all races, improving Sneak Attack, and improving Warlocks, specifically. One of the nerfs really hindered Sentinel's build, while another update improved it. WotC is not done issuing erratas and I do not think they will be done until 5e is out. And this includes Essentials builds. I do not pretend to KNOW what they will change, I am simply confidant they WILL change things.

I have already given you guys many benefits, some of which are standard on the board and some of which are not. Namely, the 24 hour bonus, assuming weapons are ready, the free expertise feat (still not available in SoW), and the background bonus (still not available in SoW). In addition, I have allowed you to remake your classes and two of you have taken me up on that, and that is fine. In addition, I have allowed you to retrain multiple powers in a level because I want you to play something you like. Finally, I have neutered some encounters so as to keep you guys alive. I didn't really want to do it because I felt there should be a challenge, but it was preferable to a TPK. I figure I deserve some benefit of the doubt when I want to discuss a power I am concerned with. I happen to enjoy the tactical aspects of 4e and I want to play a game that has tactics as a part of it. If everything is stand in place and hit as hard as you can, I get bored.

I think I might be the only DM on DG that has had mixed 4e and Essentials PCs so far (although, I know there will be one in PoL soon). I think I even noted at the time that I wasn't sure how Essentials worked, but that we could try them out. As we have played, I have noticed some potential issues and mentioned them on the spot for discussion.

The two main things SO FAR have been Magic Missile and the Essentials Rogue At-Will Move Actions. There has NOT YET been a serious problem with either. I simply can imagine WHERE THEY MIGHT BE. These issues concern me and make me uncomfortable with the use of those powers in those situations. You do not share these concerns, I understand that. However, even though YOU may not feel they are a big deal, they are a big enough deal for me to bring them up. Yes, I could make the encounters different so they never come up. One simple way is to make every minion have Resist 8 (I have read that people give minions HP equal to their level to combat this)...that would effectively neutralize Magic Missile on them, as well as remove the Sneak Attack damage. I don't want to do that. With Magic Missile, I STILL am not sure would be the best method to deal with it in such a situation, however, as Jon DOES barely use it, I am not sure it WILL be a problem, anyways.

As far as the Tricks go, this is how I see Rogues. They are supposed to use movement and/or stealth to gain a tactical advantage over an opponent. The Tricks go into this by granting a movement that gives them a tactical advantage. This fits MY conception of a Rogue. I UNDERSTAND your point about not being required to move a certain number of squares if the power doesn't say so. However, on this particular point it makes me uncomfortable that the power is an at-will that grants CA. It feels to me that as Rogue's are mobility based, the name of the power is Ambush Trick (implying you are trying to get behind someone and surprise them), and it uses a Move Action, that it should REQUIRE some sort of movement. I am inclined to require it to have a Move 1 square minimum. However, I know that this would drastically change your opinion of the power and the character, so I brought up a compromise solution (allowing you to use it once per encounter as a Move 0, and as an at-will as a Move 1-Move 6). I felt like this would satisfy both of us. Your power would basically be the same (a small, simple change that would never come up) and I would be comfortable with the power again, because it fits my conception of the Rogue. I don't see how making such a minor change destroys your character, such that you would have to make an entirely new one, but then, obviously, we are talking across each other.

And as far as nerfs go, I HAVE nerfed Sentinel, from a concern that was brought to me by Nathan. This has to do with the fact that Swordmages are supposed to use 1H blades as their weapon/implement. Swordmages have a +2 AC bonus if they are holding a sword in 1H (in addition to a +1 AC while simply holding a sword). Longswords are versatile, which means that you can use it in 2Hs to gain an extra +1 to damage. And you can, by RAW, put a second hand on a blade or take a hand off a blade as a free action. By RAW, this means that Sentinel can get +1 to damage and +2 to AC ALWAYS. But we agreed this was not the INTENT of the class or the feature. I am not sure I remember what we decided (as I think he completely stopped putting 2 hands on the blade), but I think it was something like a minor action to put his hand on or take it off of the blade (one or the other, not both). Sometimes RAW does not match with what I (and others) see as intent. This is also evidenced by Hedoni's recent death save in SoW. I have no problem with him standing up with 1 HP, I brought the Death Save rules to everyone's attention so that they could see what it says, and I more or less agree with Emily's logic for allowing it. And I think that the intent on rolling a 20 on a Death Save is for someone to recover miraculously, so why should having a healing surge matter?
_______________
Mal Geminous - Tiefling Warlord, Scales of War
Corydimbiddle - Gnome Artificer, Points of Light
Moderator
Registered: Oct 2008
Posts: 7786
Thanks for the various comments about the feat and at-will choices for Lan. I've gone with the two at-wills I mentioned (Ire Strike, Impatient Strike) and decided on Gestalt Anchor feat. That means three of us will have awesome initiative and two of us will have slightly better than crap initiative (Sentinel and Lan). :) Below is the new statblock. I'll email the dnd4e file shortly.

Josh, for your ease of play, I'll include all the player's initiatives, including the gestalt anchor bonus, at the bottom of Lan's statblock. I'm going by the level 3 values in our wiki, +1 for level 4, and +2 from Gestalt Anchor.

User posted image

  • Lan
    • Kalashtar Enlightened Ardent, Level 4
    • Passive Perception: 15, Passive Insight: 22
    • AC: 18 Fort: 16 Reflex: 13 Will: 19 Speed: 5/6, Initiative: +4 (base 2 +2 from Gestalt Anchor)
    • HP: 41, Bloodied: 20, Surge Value: 10, Surges: 9/9
    • Dual Soul: save rolls vs dazed or dominated at start of turn
    • Telepathy: two-way communication, range 5
    • Mantle of Clarity: allies in range 5, +2 perception/insight, +3 def (WIS mod) vs. OA
    • Axe Expertise: +1/+2/+3 attack per tier, can re-roll one damage die which results in a 1, but must use the second roll
    • Bolstering Mantle: when Lan spends a healing surge, an ally within his mantle (5 spaces) can either gain 5 temp hp or make a saving throw
    • Gestalt Anchor: +2 initiative all, when using last power point, allies within 5 gain +2 defenses UENT Lan
    • Martyr's Surge: +1d6 hp to Ardent Surge when Lan is bloodied
    • Powers
    • Energizing Strike (no augment grants 7 thp)
    • Impatient Strike (shift 1 before attack)
    • Ire Strike (melee 1)
    • Ardent Alacrity (free, if bloodied, burst 5, allies shift 1 or move 1/2 speed)
    • Amulet of Life +1 (when spending a healing surge, you can spend a second healing surge)
    • Ardent Surge 1 (minor, surge +1d6 and +1 defenses)
    • Ardent Surge 2 (minor, surge +1d6 and +1 defenses)
    • Augment Points: 1 2 3 4
    • Bastion of Mental Clarity (imm int, att vs my will, burst 5, +4 will all)
    • Blood Fury Halberd +1 (minor, count as bloodied for all purposes UENT)
    • Dimension Swap (teleport swap places with ally, burst 5)
    • Second Wind
    • Mental Turmoil
    • Items
    • Camouflaged Clothing (+1 stealth to hide)
    • Footpads (+1 stealth to sneak)
    • Disguise Kit (+2 bluff for passing off disquises)
    • Inquisitive's Kit (+2 perception to search an area for something specific)
    • Climber's Kit (+2 athletics for climbing)
    • Chainmail
    • Hand Crossbow
    • Crowbar
    • Fine Clothing
    • Fake Identification and Travel Papers
    • Silver goblin necklace, given to him by Govaan
    • Amulet of Life +1
    • Blood Fury Halberd +1 (+1d8 crit, +1d12 crit when bloodied)
    • Healing Potion
    • Skills
    • Bluff, Diplomacy, Insight, Streetwise: 12
    • Intimidate: 6
    • Dungeoneering, Heal, Nature, Perception, Stealth: 5
    • Endurance: 3
    • Acrobatics, Athletics, Thievery: 1
    • Arcana, History, Religion: 1

    Group Initiative: Lan-4, Sentinel-5, Geen-8, Kurvilis-9, Khav-11
    (allies within 5 gain +2 perception/+2 insight, allies and Lan gain +3 defense vs OA)
    _______________
    Ravenblade - Dwarf Two-Weapon Ranger, Hammer of Moradin (Scales of War)
Moderator
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 1238
Yay. No more going after the inanimate objects!
_______________
Sentinel - Warforged Shielding Swordmage (Eberron)
Allena Walmond - Human Paladin of Amaunator (Forgotten Realms)
Variel - Elf Beastmaster Ranger
Thaelan the Clanless - Dwarf Protector Spirit Shaman (Dungeon Delve 4)
Moderator
Registered: Oct 2008
Posts: 7786
nmathew wrote
Yay. No more going after the inanimate objects!


Ha! I guess that means Lan, with his lowest initiative is what....a candalabra.

Josh, I thought to wait on sending you my level 4 character sheet in case we find some neat items for the ardent on the hobgoblins we just defeated.
_______________
Ravenblade - Dwarf Two-Weapon Ranger, Hammer of Moradin (Scales of War)
Moderator
Registered: Oct 2008
Posts: 4627
Yeah, sorry. I am starting my Fall class today. I probably won't get back to Eberron until Wednesday.
_______________
Mal Geminous - Tiefling Warlord, Scales of War
Corydimbiddle - Gnome Artificer, Points of Light
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2008
Posts: 5084
Location: Los Angeles, CA
I'm converting Khav from rogue-thief (assassin) to assassin-executioner (rogue) from Player's Option: Heroes of Shadow, which is a different build than Jonathan's using for Demuriath. I kept the same magic items Khav already has and just added a couple pieces of standard gear the new build uses.

Here's the PDF:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B4yWRtltQ_QmZGFlOGZkNDUtMTgwMC00OGNjLTllYWUtODIzMWFlYzg4Njgy&hl=en_US

Josh, let me know if you have any questions or if you have problems with any aspect of the character.
_______________
Salazar Miller - Human Sorcerer 24 - Scales of War
Azad Halim al'Zahir - Tiefling Battlemind|Paladin 7 - Points of Light
Khavak'aashta - Half-Orc Thief 5 - Eberron
Dwimmerlaik - Revenant Hexblade 2 - Dark Campaign
Moderator
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 1238
Death attack looks awesomely awesome. I don't know how often it will actually come up in game play, but I covet that.
_______________
Sentinel - Warforged Shielding Swordmage (Eberron)
Allena Walmond - Human Paladin of Amaunator (Forgotten Realms)
Variel - Elf Beastmaster Ranger
Thaelan the Clanless - Dwarf Protector Spirit Shaman (Dungeon Delve 4)
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2008
Posts: 5084
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Yeah, I thought it looked pretty cool too. Its sort of a passive striker damage feature, and could end up saving a lot of standard actions that would otherwise be used to finish off almost-dead enemies.
_______________
Salazar Miller - Human Sorcerer 24 - Scales of War
Azad Halim al'Zahir - Tiefling Battlemind|Paladin 7 - Points of Light
Khavak'aashta - Half-Orc Thief 5 - Eberron
Dwimmerlaik - Revenant Hexblade 2 - Dark Campaign
Moderator
Registered: Oct 2008
Posts: 4627
Ok, I have Sentinel's CS, and Lan's and Kurvilis' changes (although, not their ability score bumps), and Gary is still deciding on Khav. I have nothing for Geen, though. Later on tonight I will push the story forward slightly (basically completely resolve the encounter, etc), but before moving on I need those character sheets. And if Gary goes the Executioner route, then I think he could describe the class and play style a bit. If he decides to go with the Thief still, we have compromised on him roleplaying SOME sort of a movement in order to get the non-movement abilities of the at-will move actions.
_______________
Mal Geminous - Tiefling Warlord, Scales of War
Corydimbiddle - Gnome Artificer, Points of Light
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2008
Posts: 5084
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Any thoughts from the group on the Rogue-Thief vs Assassin-Executioner?

Thief advantages - Better movement options helps with CA, better accuracy even without CA, great round-to-round damage with pretty reliable CA with the compromise, more skills, can use Backstab multiple times per fight, no dailies so he can be fully effective for as long as he has surges.

Executioner advantages - Damage doesn't rely on having CA, greater capacity to for once per encounter nova, death attack finishes off near-dead enemies, more control options (can use at-wills to grab or knock prone), poisons give me a pseudo-daily for big fights, more healing surges.

At level 4, if he remains a thief, Khav gets a feat (Backstabber to bump Sneak Attack from 2d6 to 2d8 probably) and another movement trick.

What does everyone think?

If I don't convert Khav to an Executioner, I might end up playing one on EN World (which would let me build a PC as an Executioner from the ground up, instead of trying to reconfigure an existing character, mechanically and conceptually, into one). As I looked into it, the class looks pretty fun, but so is the thief.
_______________
Salazar Miller - Human Sorcerer 24 - Scales of War
Azad Halim al'Zahir - Tiefling Battlemind|Paladin 7 - Points of Light
Khavak'aashta - Half-Orc Thief 5 - Eberron
Dwimmerlaik - Revenant Hexblade 2 - Dark Campaign
Moderator
Registered: Sep 2009
Posts: 1238
Gary, you said that you had Khav as thief was pretty much how you had envisioned the character from the beginning. I strongly suggest that you play whichever build you believe you'll get the most enjoyment from. I never pictured Khav as someone running around with a garrote, but if you want to go that way, cool. I know that's unhelpful, but I'll have fun playing with either build.
_______________
Sentinel - Warforged Shielding Swordmage (Eberron)
Allena Walmond - Human Paladin of Amaunator (Forgotten Realms)
Variel - Elf Beastmaster Ranger
Thaelan the Clanless - Dwarf Protector Spirit Shaman (Dungeon Delve 4)
Moderator
Registered: Jun 2008
Posts: 5084
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Thanks, Nathan. Yeah, it's been kind of an odd transition for Khav. From Fighter|Rogue Hybrid (MC Assassin) to Rogue-Thief (MC Assassin) to maybe an Assassin-Executioner (MC Rogue).

As cool as the Executioner is, Khav does fit very well as a Thief, both in terms of effectiveness (with Josh's RP compromise) and mechanics. A dash of assassin has always been a part of Khav's background, but -as you say - not necessarily the full-fledged "garrote and poison" routine. It might be better if I get my Executioner fix in another character that's conceptualized as one from the start.

If I do stick with Thief, I've got Khav's rogue trick to pick, and I still have Azad's level 5 daily to finalize and stat block to update and Salazar's stat block to update. Going to be a busy evening of Dead Goblins! :)
_______________
Salazar Miller - Human Sorcerer 24 - Scales of War
Azad Halim al'Zahir - Tiefling Battlemind|Paladin 7 - Points of Light
Khavak'aashta - Half-Orc Thief 5 - Eberron
Dwimmerlaik - Revenant Hexblade 2 - Dark Campaign

Page: « < ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > »

DeadGoblins.com » Eberron » Eberron Leveling and Item Discussions

DeadGoblins.com is powered by UseBB 1 Forum Software