Elder Mod's Forum [Archive] - Wizards Community

Elder Mod's Forum [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Jindl
03-02-04, 03:48 PM Hey -

The purpose of this thread is to give a place for the 8 elder mods to have public discussions. This could include any of the following:

1. A place for Mo, Cat, and I to mention ideas we have for making the Core Colisuem better and get feedback from the ones who have been here the longest.

2. A place where the Elder's can discuss amongst themselves some of the fight challenges or rules interpretations.

3. A place where others can draw our attention to new questions / fight challenges. (The proper way to do this is to post a notice on this thread, stating and linking that you have begun another thread containing your question / challenge.)

The Current Elder Mod's are all invited to share in the discussion. Hopefully keeping our votes / discussions in this public forum will help all the players in the arena understand the reasons behind our decisions.

(If anyone has an idea to better state the purpose or format of this thread, please let me know.)

-Jindl

The Elder Mods
Moherajikuyx
Snarkhunter
LLMadCow
Jindl
Magagumo
Caterane
Tellish_of_Ket
MotherBast
Arstimis
03-02-04, 04:29 PM Council of Elder Mods (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=193215)

Debate: Improved Natural Attack Allowed..as it should be :D

Core Arena Debate: Allies (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=184499)

3.5 Psionics (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=192452)

Debate: Stupid MW Stuff Allow only tools related to trade skills [Craft, Profession, Perform, and Handle animal. added Ride]

Possible Varriant: Iron Man(/woman/thing)
(http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=194192)Poll (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=207576)

Character Violations (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=196885)

FIGHT MASTER, something better than that! Pitlord

Ventriloquism (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=201914)

Copying spells from NPC's or Scrolls Not Allowed

Wilded Armor Not Allowed

Red Wizards?
Caterane
03-02-04, 10:06 PM Good idea Jindl.

I suggest another thread for the senior mods votes, with only 8 posts (one for each mod) and then close it. This is to get the polls restricted to the seniors only, like discussed.

The polls are in case of a 4:4 draw.

Arti: Get out here :D
Moherajikuyx
03-03-04, 04:05 AM Now we can have a single thread for any question to discuss :)

(rehab goes on... That awful discussion thread was a sever hindrance for our forumability.)
MotherBast
03-07-04, 10:49 AM I suppose one of the Game Masters needs to create an open poll thread for the INA issue, as the elder mod vote is a 4-4 tie on the issue.
Tellish_of_Ket
03-08-04, 07:38 AM @INA: sending it to the polls seems like a good idea unless someone has something new to add?

@Arstimis - I like the topic headers you've created at the beginning of this thread. Will make for easy access in the future.

-ToK
Caterane
03-26-04, 03:22 PM Alright, first of all Tellish and Jindl please go to the Council and vote on the extended [Ma]tools issue. Thanks.

Then, LLMad brought up the Red Wizard issue. I didn´t know that it was forbidden and I`m asking myself, why? We didn`t decide upon a world and why should we ban FR stuff?

I see it that way: there are already only so much PrC out there, not much choice in here so every banned PrC decreases the options greatly.

Let`s discuss that.

@Arti: Ok, you`re our scribe then :)
Tellish_of_Ket
03-26-04, 03:28 PM done.
MotherBast
03-26-04, 03:54 PM I remember the origional Red Wizard discussion, and it was decided that since Read Wizard was "relm specific", that it was not available for "any" campagin. The point of this thread orrigonaly was to test Maximized builds that could be used in any and every D&D game. Also, in the red Wizard description I think it says something about the class being too powerful for a non-relms game. For those two reasons, the Red Wizard class was not allowed. This debate took place before I was an actual member of the Arena, and was just lurking.
Caterane
03-26-04, 04:01 PM I remember Sloisel`s Red Wizard but I thought he was disallowed because of the Venerable age and not the class.

I can see both sides of the arguments now. It seems like that`s a subjective matter; one might think this way, the other one may see it differently.

I think it will come down to a poll in the end but I would prefer a Council poll instead of an open poll. Too many in the House of Commons may vote because they want to play one and not because it is balanced (or not).

Motherbast, what`s your opinion on that?
MotherBast
03-26-04, 05:24 PM Well, I have never seen the Red Wizard played. The entire forgotten Relms setting is way to "high fantasy" for me. I'm more of a "gritty" RPGer.

I did look at the Red Wizard though, and this is what I decided.

First, if we allow Red Wizards, then in turn we allow the Tattoo Focus feat, which has been dis-allowed up untill this point. This feat is not only more powerful that Spell focus, but also stacks with spell focus. If It becomes legal, I don't see any specilast Wizard not taking it instead of Spell focus, or taking both. Still, even concedering that, I don't see the feat as being that unbalanceing. It is only a +1 to the DCs, and even with it, Spell Focus, and Greater Spell Focus you can only get +3 from feats. That isen't a lot, concedering its 3 feats, and 3 feats would give your target a total of +6 to saves (Iron will, Great Fort, reflex each for +2). Not that I see anyone ever actually taking all three save feats, but the point is, I don't see tattoo focus as being unbalancing.

Now, as for the class itself.

Mostly, its pretty standard. To get in, you gotta meet some requs that any pure wizard with a speciality scool will meet by 5th level as long as they take Extend Spell at 3rd and another MM feat at the bonus feat for 5. At 6th, Greater Spell focus is the way to go, assuming Human and first 2 feats were Tat focus and Spell Focus.

Now, this wizard starts going Red at level 6. He pretty much gets nothing. He loses a school, and gains a +1 to saves vs. spells from his school. The real power is his +3 to DCs from all spells in his chosen school. That is from his feats though, not the class itself. As this wizard gains levels, his Save bonus incresses, but that really will not help him much at all. He gains a few RP abilitys, which will have absolutly no impact on the arena (Circle Leader, Scribe Tattoo, Greater Circle Leader, Circle Magic). The only Arena usable power he gets will be Spell Power, which will have him casting spells from his special school at 20th caster level by level 15. That is pretty nifty, but again, not game braking. He gets to add 5 minutes to his spell durations, or 5 damage dice to his damage spells, so forth and so on. It will help him meet the Pre-buff durations quicker, espicaly for his chosen school, but unless that school has a lot of buffs, big woop. If it does, then you wasted the tatoo focus feat, since your not worried about the DCs of your buffs. Plus, all the nifty things a Red Wizard gets apply only to ONE school. Since that school is going to be vastly more powerful that all others for you, and the fact that you are now restrected from 3 other scholls, it will make it absurdly easy for your opponit to guess what spells you might be preparing.

So, my basic thoughts on the matter are thus. With all the nifty RP stuff a Red Wizard gets, I can see it being a powerhouse in the Game World. With its extreame one dimentional nature without the RP stuff, however, I don't see it as any real force to fear in the arena. A wizard who took the Tatoo Focus feat would be nearly as dangerous as a red wizard, and not as limited. Personaly, I think the real debate is wether or not to allow the tatoo focus feat. I would vote yes, as I don't see it as being "that" unbalancing, even though I do realize it is better than Spell Focus.

All that having been said, the issue about wether or not "Red Wizard" is core still remains. It very planly says it is specific to FR, and the point of the Arena is that any of its characters can be droped into "any" world. A red wizard can't.

On that issue, I would have to agree. But, seeing as the Red Wizard is in the DMG, and the SRD, it appears everywhere that core material appers, so anyone in the Arena has access to it. Also, it is very easy to simply change the Home City requirement for the class and drop it into any RP world. I belive the real reason to keep things "core only" is availability. To make sure everyone has access to all the material. Since Red Wizard appears in the Core material, I say let him play. Its a new build. As a matter of fact, since Dra'kel's concept has now been killed by an arena vote, I will probably soon retire him. If Red Wizard is allowed, I will replace Dra'kel with a wizard just to be the first to try out this new Prc that has yet to appear in the arena.

On the open poll issue, I would agree with Cat. Far to may "mage haters" voiced the opinion that wizards were too powerful in the "copy spells" vote. If this were to go to open polls, the mage haters would vote the red wizard down quicker than you could type the vote post. The "fighter contengent", as they deemed themselves, would never let the red wizard, or the tatoo focus feat, see the light of day.
Magagumo
03-28-04, 05:58 PM *Nods* You've said anything I've thought about the Red WIzard, MB.

Upgradded duratiosn are fine, but not game-shattering when 3k will get you a rod to extend them all by 8th level. Besides, req 8th level means these boys are walking in with long-duration stuff anyways.

I think Red Wizards will never be dangerous in oru Arena, though I think one should only be able to take Tatoo Focus if one is going to take Red Wizard ASAP, unless non-Core creeps in, which it won't.

Personally, my only good mental image of the Red Wizard is a wizard with a decent Charisma, as they could nab the Thayan Knight from Complete Warrior as a cohort, and reap the awesome benefits from the two's synergy... but as said before, we won't be seeing that here.
Tellish_of_Ket
03-29-04, 01:11 AM I would agree as well.

The only reason for the tatoo focus would be to become a red wizard. Any character taking the feat, MUST become a red wizard at his/her earliest opportunity.

That's just my opinion.

-ToK
MotherBast
03-29-04, 04:50 PM I would second that restriction for Tatoo Focus... After all, the only way to get it is to be tatooed by another Red Wizard, and why would thay tatoo someone who wasen't planning to join them?
Tellish_of_Ket
03-29-04, 11:40 PM And i also want to add, you must see the Prc to it's end.

I can see Jindl breaking this already by saying, "Well, we only agreed you had to take it, not how many levels you had to take." And just taking the first level.

So if Red Wizards is allowed, and i have nothing against this, after 5th level, you will be stuck taking your next 10 levels as Red Wizard Prc. And that means no multiclassing into any other class.

-ToK
Jindl
03-30-04, 01:13 AM Do you see how much houseruling has to be done to consider the Red Wizard? That's the problem with the setting specific class. It must be modified to be allowed into any campaign other than the intended setting.

The Red Wizard is not a core prestige class. It was included in the DMG/SRD as an example of how to make a setting specific class. And while I agree with MotherBast's analysis of the respective power of the class, I still do not think it is core.

I remain against allowing the class.

But if I am outvoted and you do allow it, don't put all these houserules about "uninterrupted levels at earliest opportunities" and stuff like that on it. We don't treat any other PrC that way.

-Jindl
Tellish_of_Ket
03-30-04, 06:17 AM Then no red wizard. :)

Suits me fine either way. Consider my vote NO as well.

-ToK
MotherBast
03-30-04, 07:25 AM I don't see any reason to restrict the red wizard to taking all 10 levels. If someone took one level of red wizard just to get tatoo focus, I see no problem with that. One level of red wizard is worthless, so gaining the power to take tatoo focus as a feat is balanced enough aginst the wortlessness of 1 level in the class.

I see no reson to "house-rule" red wizard to make it usable in the arena. Just enforce the rules it already sets for itself.
Jindl
03-30-04, 08:54 AM @MB - So basically you are suggesting that we add a pre-req to the Tattoo Focus feat: That you must take a level of Red Wizard at your earliest opportunity. That is a house rule, because in an FR campaign, a spellcaster could take the tattoo focus feat and then never become a Red Wizard.

-Jindl
Caterane
03-30-04, 10:48 AM ...which no DM would allow
Jindl
03-30-04, 11:07 AM Oh, that's an easy character concept.

Boy grows up in Thay. Wants to be a wizard. Learns magic (becomes a 3rd level wiz). Takes Tattoo Focus. Discovers that Red Wizards are EVIL (and decides he wants to be GOOD), runs away from Thay, becomes a different prestige class instead.

Sure, he would have Red Wizards as an enemy, but then so do most good aligned characters. And it is entirely reasonable for him to have Tatoo Focus from his earlier life / magical training.

I think most FR DM's would allow this (and indeed, I had a fellow player run something like this in a game I used to play in).

-Jindl
Caterane
03-30-04, 11:14 AM What about this:

Boy grows up in southeastern USA. Wants to play a wizard with the Tattoo focus feat without taking the Prestige Class. Learns that this is evil and that his DM would never allow it, so he invents a story to fool him but the DM makes his Dc -5 sense motive check and smacks the trickster on the head.
LLMadCow
04-02-04, 11:54 AM There is no need for a bunch of house rules. Just enforce the rules that are already in place for the Red Wizards, according to what the book says. It is an interesting character, and I agree that some aspects of it will already be nerfed due to the RP aspect of it.

Tatoo Focus should be available to any character, regardless of his status as a Red Wizard or desire to become a Red Wizard.
SnarkHunter
04-02-04, 02:28 PM I'm in favor of allowing red wizard and tatoo focus with no restrictions.

I'm even curious if its posisble to take advantage of circle magic with a high leadership score (though I won't make the character myself).
Druid Roxors
04-02-04, 03:18 PM Wrong thread!! Forgive Forgive!!!!

*Deleted*
MotherBast
04-02-04, 03:56 PM Your example is possible, Jindl, but not likely. Only another Red Wizard can give the tatoo necessary to gain the feat, and they only give the tatoo to characters planning to become Red Wizards. While it is "possible" that a change of heart could occure, that is one of those "role-play" issues.

We don't allow copying from other spellcasters for the same reason. While it is "possible", it isen't likely to actually happen, and without heavy role-play will not. This is the same situation.

Still, personaly, I wouldn't object to not restricting Tatoo Focus to only Red Wizards. I was mearly stating that I belived the Red Wizard class already did that. You have pointed out how it is "possible" to overcome that restriction. I don't think your example, or any example, is likely enough to ignore the restriction for the arena, but if others feel it is, I have no problem with that.
MotherBast
04-06-04, 04:21 PM So if were all done arguing about the Red Wizard, I'd say we make a dicision on him, and Tatoo Focus.

We still need to come to a conclusion on the Allie issue, and we all still wait for Jindl's comments on the Wildshape/Armor issue.

We need to really start focussing on resolving these kinds of issues quickly. These same descussions have gone on for weeks. It was to avoid week long debates we orrigonaly created the "Elders." It was supposed to be the job of the Elders to resolve issues like this quickly, but I find that we are dragging them out way more than is necessary.

I think we need to institute a time-limit on any discussion brought to the Elder discussion thread. At the very most, 2 weeks from the day the issue is first brought up in this thread. 2 weeks is twice as long as it was supposed to take orrigonaly, but that gives everyone enough time to post at least a couple of times.

If after 2 weeks, we haven't reached an agreement, then we should then resolve it with the vote.

The current discussions I mentioned above have all been ongoing for at least a month. Its time we resolve them.
Magagumo
04-06-04, 10:48 PM Too true MB...

I don't know where allies stand at this point.. we discussed how druids gain allies by comparing class level to CR, and I heard mummerings of ECL -2.. which of course suggests that all creatures have an ECL. *Shrug* I figured the Char level -2 treatment for spells and skills function well (garnering Harvester 1 the CR 6 cauchemar at his 15th level I believe). This kept CR in the mix, since using ECL on animals and undead tends to be ineffcient (zombies have twice the HD of skels their CR, why should skels be favored?), and meant that druid's still retained the superior followers.

As no one has discussed this issue in awhile, what are Elder thoughts on this proposaL? Should we give it a try?

As for Wildshape/Armor, I am willing to wait for Jindl, only because the only character affected by this outcome is locked in the level glacier.

On that note, however, I cannot comprehend how a 13k item is granting a class feature (Wisdom bonus to AC) to wearers. I had presumed that such an inexpensive item would grant the +1 bonus to AC, and would aid a monk in gaining more powerful attacks... not sure about giving other classes monstrous ACs... what keeps monsters from using this too?

Imagine a Balor with a monk's belt.. reasonable buy within their CR 20 treasure, and their AC rises even higher.. it just doesn't make sense for such a unique ability to be given out so freely...
Magagumo
04-06-04, 11:09 PM Wee!! Stupid network.. I didn't know any post got through, let alone two ;)
Tellish_of_Ket
04-07-04, 06:11 AM Yeah, my final vote would be NO to both red wizard and tatoo focus. It doesn't really make sense (despite that it's not unbalancing) to have it as "core" arena.

-ToK
MotherBast
04-18-04, 07:59 AM Ok, really, these debates have stalled long enough. Since no more discussion seems to be forthcomming, I belive its time for us to vote on this.

One of the "Fight Masters" should add the remaining two issues to the Elder Mod votes thread.

"Should we allow Red Wizards?"

"Should we "fix" allies?"

The vote for what to do about allies should wait till we decide wether or not we need to do anything. No point in discussing it if we decide not to change it. If we all post a vote we can get these issues resolved in a week or two.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Jindl 03-02-04, 03:48 PM	Hey - The purpose of this thread is to give a place for the 8 elder mods to have public discussions. This could include any of the following: 1. A place for Mo, Cat, and I to mention ideas we have for making the Core Colisuem better and get feedback from the ones who have been here the longest. 2. A place where the Elder's can discuss amongst themselves some of the fight challenges or rules interpretations. 3. A place where others can draw our attention to new questions / fight challenges. (The proper way to do this is to post a notice on this thread, stating and linking that you have begun another thread containing your question / challenge.) The Current Elder Mod's are all invited to share in the discussion. Hopefully keeping our votes / discussions in this public forum will help all the players in the arena understand the reasons behind our decisions. (If anyone has an idea to better state the purpose or format of this thread, please let me know.) -Jindl The Elder Mods Moherajikuyx Snarkhunter LLMadCow Jindl Magagumo Caterane Tellish_of_Ket MotherBast
Arstimis 03-02-04, 04:29 PM	Council of Elder Mods (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=193215) Debate: Improved Natural Attack Allowed..as it should be :D Core Arena Debate: Allies (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=184499) 3.5 Psionics (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=192452) Debate: Stupid MW Stuff Allow only tools related to trade skills [Craft, Profession, Perform, and Handle animal. added Ride] Possible Varriant: Iron Man(/woman/thing) (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=194192)Poll (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=207576) Character Violations (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=196885) FIGHT MASTER, something better than that! Pitlord Ventriloquism (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=201914) Copying spells from NPC's or Scrolls Not Allowed Wilded Armor Not Allowed Red Wizards?
Caterane 03-02-04, 10:06 PM	Good idea Jindl. I suggest another thread for the senior mods votes, with only 8 posts (one for each mod) and then close it. This is to get the polls restricted to the seniors only, like discussed. The polls are in case of a 4:4 draw. Arti: Get out here :D
Moherajikuyx 03-03-04, 04:05 AM	Now we can have a single thread for any question to discuss :) (rehab goes on... That awful discussion thread was a sever hindrance for our forumability.)
MotherBast 03-07-04, 10:49 AM	I suppose one of the Game Masters needs to create an open poll thread for the INA issue, as the elder mod vote is a 4-4 tie on the issue.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-08-04, 07:38 AM	@INA: sending it to the polls seems like a good idea unless someone has something new to add? @Arstimis - I like the topic headers you've created at the beginning of this thread. Will make for easy access in the future. -ToK
Caterane 03-26-04, 03:22 PM	Alright, first of all Tellish and Jindl please go to the Council and vote on the extended [Ma]tools issue. Thanks. Then, LLMad brought up the Red Wizard issue. I didn´t know that it was forbidden and I`m asking myself, why? We didn`t decide upon a world and why should we ban FR stuff? I see it that way: there are already only so much PrC out there, not much choice in here so every banned PrC decreases the options greatly. Let`s discuss that. @Arti: Ok, you`re our scribe then :)
Tellish_of_Ket 03-26-04, 03:28 PM	done.
MotherBast 03-26-04, 03:54 PM	I remember the origional Red Wizard discussion, and it was decided that since Read Wizard was "relm specific", that it was not available for "any" campagin. The point of this thread orrigonaly was to test Maximized builds that could be used in any and every D&D game. Also, in the red Wizard description I think it says something about the class being too powerful for a non-relms game. For those two reasons, the Red Wizard class was not allowed. This debate took place before I was an actual member of the Arena, and was just lurking.
Caterane 03-26-04, 04:01 PM	I remember Sloisel`s Red Wizard but I thought he was disallowed because of the Venerable age and not the class. I can see both sides of the arguments now. It seems like that`s a subjective matter; one might think this way, the other one may see it differently. I think it will come down to a poll in the end but I would prefer a Council poll instead of an open poll. Too many in the House of Commons may vote because they want to play one and not because it is balanced (or not). Motherbast, what`s your opinion on that?
MotherBast 03-26-04, 05:24 PM	Well, I have never seen the Red Wizard played. The entire forgotten Relms setting is way to "high fantasy" for me. I'm more of a "gritty" RPGer. I did look at the Red Wizard though, and this is what I decided. First, if we allow Red Wizards, then in turn we allow the Tattoo Focus feat, which has been dis-allowed up untill this point. This feat is not only more powerful that Spell focus, but also stacks with spell focus. If It becomes legal, I don't see any specilast Wizard not taking it instead of Spell focus, or taking both. Still, even concedering that, I don't see the feat as being that unbalanceing. It is only a +1 to the DCs, and even with it, Spell Focus, and Greater Spell Focus you can only get +3 from feats. That isen't a lot, concedering its 3 feats, and 3 feats would give your target a total of +6 to saves (Iron will, Great Fort, reflex each for +2). Not that I see anyone ever actually taking all three save feats, but the point is, I don't see tattoo focus as being unbalancing. Now, as for the class itself. Mostly, its pretty standard. To get in, you gotta meet some requs that any pure wizard with a speciality scool will meet by 5th level as long as they take Extend Spell at 3rd and another MM feat at the bonus feat for 5. At 6th, Greater Spell focus is the way to go, assuming Human and first 2 feats were Tat focus and Spell Focus. Now, this wizard starts going Red at level 6. He pretty much gets nothing. He loses a school, and gains a +1 to saves vs. spells from his school. The real power is his +3 to DCs from all spells in his chosen school. That is from his feats though, not the class itself. As this wizard gains levels, his Save bonus incresses, but that really will not help him much at all. He gains a few RP abilitys, which will have absolutly no impact on the arena (Circle Leader, Scribe Tattoo, Greater Circle Leader, Circle Magic). The only Arena usable power he gets will be Spell Power, which will have him casting spells from his special school at 20th caster level by level 15. That is pretty nifty, but again, not game braking. He gets to add 5 minutes to his spell durations, or 5 damage dice to his damage spells, so forth and so on. It will help him meet the Pre-buff durations quicker, espicaly for his chosen school, but unless that school has a lot of buffs, big woop. If it does, then you wasted the tatoo focus feat, since your not worried about the DCs of your buffs. Plus, all the nifty things a Red Wizard gets apply only to ONE school. Since that school is going to be vastly more powerful that all others for you, and the fact that you are now restrected from 3 other scholls, it will make it absurdly easy for your opponit to guess what spells you might be preparing. So, my basic thoughts on the matter are thus. With all the nifty RP stuff a Red Wizard gets, I can see it being a powerhouse in the Game World. With its extreame one dimentional nature without the RP stuff, however, I don't see it as any real force to fear in the arena. A wizard who took the Tatoo Focus feat would be nearly as dangerous as a red wizard, and not as limited. Personaly, I think the real debate is wether or not to allow the tatoo focus feat. I would vote yes, as I don't see it as being "that" unbalancing, even though I do realize it is better than Spell Focus. All that having been said, the issue about wether or not "Red Wizard" is core still remains. It very planly says it is specific to FR, and the point of the Arena is that any of its characters can be droped into "any" world. A red wizard can't. On that issue, I would have to agree. But, seeing as the Red Wizard is in the DMG, and the SRD, it appears everywhere that core material appers, so anyone in the Arena has access to it. Also, it is very easy to simply change the Home City requirement for the class and drop it into any RP world. I belive the real reason to keep things "core only" is availability. To make sure everyone has access to all the material. Since Red Wizard appears in the Core material, I say let him play. Its a new build. As a matter of fact, since Dra'kel's concept has now been killed by an arena vote, I will probably soon retire him. If Red Wizard is allowed, I will replace Dra'kel with a wizard just to be the first to try out this new Prc that has yet to appear in the arena. On the open poll issue, I would agree with Cat. Far to may "mage haters" voiced the opinion that wizards were too powerful in the "copy spells" vote. If this were to go to open polls, the mage haters would vote the red wizard down quicker than you could type the vote post. The "fighter contengent", as they deemed themselves, would never let the red wizard, or the tatoo focus feat, see the light of day.
Magagumo 03-28-04, 05:58 PM	Nods You've said anything I've thought about the Red WIzard, MB. Upgradded duratiosn are fine, but not game-shattering when 3k will get you a rod to extend them all by 8th level. Besides, req 8th level means these boys are walking in with long-duration stuff anyways. I think Red Wizards will never be dangerous in oru Arena, though I think one should only be able to take Tatoo Focus if one is going to take Red Wizard ASAP, unless non-Core creeps in, which it won't. Personally, my only good mental image of the Red Wizard is a wizard with a decent Charisma, as they could nab the Thayan Knight from Complete Warrior as a cohort, and reap the awesome benefits from the two's synergy... but as said before, we won't be seeing that here.
Tellish_of_Ket 03-29-04, 01:11 AM	I would agree as well. The only reason for the tatoo focus would be to become a red wizard. Any character taking the feat, MUST become a red wizard at his/her earliest opportunity. That's just my opinion. -ToK
MotherBast 03-29-04, 04:50 PM	I would second that restriction for Tatoo Focus... After all, the only way to get it is to be tatooed by another Red Wizard, and why would thay tatoo someone who wasen't planning to join them?
Tellish_of_Ket 03-29-04, 11:40 PM	And i also want to add, you must see the Prc to it's end. I can see Jindl breaking this already by saying, "Well, we only agreed you had to take it, not how many levels you had to take." And just taking the first level. So if Red Wizards is allowed, and i have nothing against this, after 5th level, you will be stuck taking your next 10 levels as Red Wizard Prc. And that means no multiclassing into any other class. -ToK
Jindl 03-30-04, 01:13 AM	Do you see how much houseruling has to be done to consider the Red Wizard? That's the problem with the setting specific class. It must be modified to be allowed into any campaign other than the intended setting. The Red Wizard is not a core prestige class. It was included in the DMG/SRD as an example of how to make a setting specific class. And while I agree with MotherBast's analysis of the respective power of the class, I still do not think it is core. I remain against allowing the class. But if I am outvoted and you do allow it, don't put all these houserules about "uninterrupted levels at earliest opportunities" and stuff like that on it. We don't treat any other PrC that way. -Jindl
Tellish_of_Ket 03-30-04, 06:17 AM	Then no red wizard. :) Suits me fine either way. Consider my vote NO as well. -ToK
MotherBast 03-30-04, 07:25 AM	I don't see any reason to restrict the red wizard to taking all 10 levels. If someone took one level of red wizard just to get tatoo focus, I see no problem with that. One level of red wizard is worthless, so gaining the power to take tatoo focus as a feat is balanced enough aginst the wortlessness of 1 level in the class. I see no reson to "house-rule" red wizard to make it usable in the arena. Just enforce the rules it already sets for itself.
Jindl 03-30-04, 08:54 AM	@MB - So basically you are suggesting that we add a pre-req to the Tattoo Focus feat: That you must take a level of Red Wizard at your earliest opportunity. That is a house rule, because in an FR campaign, a spellcaster could take the tattoo focus feat and then never become a Red Wizard. -Jindl
Caterane 03-30-04, 10:48 AM	...which no DM would allow
Jindl 03-30-04, 11:07 AM	Oh, that's an easy character concept. Boy grows up in Thay. Wants to be a wizard. Learns magic (becomes a 3rd level wiz). Takes Tattoo Focus. Discovers that Red Wizards are EVIL (and decides he wants to be GOOD), runs away from Thay, becomes a different prestige class instead. Sure, he would have Red Wizards as an enemy, but then so do most good aligned characters. And it is entirely reasonable for him to have Tatoo Focus from his earlier life / magical training. I think most FR DM's would allow this (and indeed, I had a fellow player run something like this in a game I used to play in). -Jindl
Caterane 03-30-04, 11:14 AM	What about this: Boy grows up in southeastern USA. Wants to play a wizard with the Tattoo focus feat without taking the Prestige Class. Learns that this is evil and that his DM would never allow it, so he invents a story to fool him but the DM makes his Dc -5 sense motive check and smacks the trickster on the head.
LLMadCow 04-02-04, 11:54 AM	There is no need for a bunch of house rules. Just enforce the rules that are already in place for the Red Wizards, according to what the book says. It is an interesting character, and I agree that some aspects of it will already be nerfed due to the RP aspect of it. Tatoo Focus should be available to any character, regardless of his status as a Red Wizard or desire to become a Red Wizard.
SnarkHunter 04-02-04, 02:28 PM	I'm in favor of allowing red wizard and tatoo focus with no restrictions. I'm even curious if its posisble to take advantage of circle magic with a high leadership score (though I won't make the character myself).
Druid Roxors 04-02-04, 03:18 PM	Wrong thread!! Forgive Forgive!!!! Deleted
MotherBast 04-02-04, 03:56 PM	Your example is possible, Jindl, but not likely. Only another Red Wizard can give the tatoo necessary to gain the feat, and they only give the tatoo to characters planning to become Red Wizards. While it is "possible" that a change of heart could occure, that is one of those "role-play" issues. We don't allow copying from other spellcasters for the same reason. While it is "possible", it isen't likely to actually happen, and without heavy role-play will not. This is the same situation. Still, personaly, I wouldn't object to not restricting Tatoo Focus to only Red Wizards. I was mearly stating that I belived the Red Wizard class already did that. You have pointed out how it is "possible" to overcome that restriction. I don't think your example, or any example, is likely enough to ignore the restriction for the arena, but if others feel it is, I have no problem with that.
MotherBast 04-06-04, 04:21 PM	So if were all done arguing about the Red Wizard, I'd say we make a dicision on him, and Tatoo Focus. We still need to come to a conclusion on the Allie issue, and we all still wait for Jindl's comments on the Wildshape/Armor issue. We need to really start focussing on resolving these kinds of issues quickly. These same descussions have gone on for weeks. It was to avoid week long debates we orrigonaly created the "Elders." It was supposed to be the job of the Elders to resolve issues like this quickly, but I find that we are dragging them out way more than is necessary. I think we need to institute a time-limit on any discussion brought to the Elder discussion thread. At the very most, 2 weeks from the day the issue is first brought up in this thread. 2 weeks is twice as long as it was supposed to take orrigonaly, but that gives everyone enough time to post at least a couple of times. If after 2 weeks, we haven't reached an agreement, then we should then resolve it with the vote. The current discussions I mentioned above have all been ongoing for at least a month. Its time we resolve them.
Magagumo 04-06-04, 10:48 PM	Too true MB... I don't know where allies stand at this point.. we discussed how druids gain allies by comparing class level to CR, and I heard mummerings of ECL -2.. which of course suggests that all creatures have an ECL. Shrug I figured the Char level -2 treatment for spells and skills function well (garnering Harvester 1 the CR 6 cauchemar at his 15th level I believe). This kept CR in the mix, since using ECL on animals and undead tends to be ineffcient (zombies have twice the HD of skels their CR, why should skels be favored?), and meant that druid's still retained the superior followers. As no one has discussed this issue in awhile, what are Elder thoughts on this proposaL? Should we give it a try? As for Wildshape/Armor, I am willing to wait for Jindl, only because the only character affected by this outcome is locked in the level glacier. On that note, however, I cannot comprehend how a 13k item is granting a class feature (Wisdom bonus to AC) to wearers. I had presumed that such an inexpensive item would grant the +1 bonus to AC, and would aid a monk in gaining more powerful attacks... not sure about giving other classes monstrous ACs... what keeps monsters from using this too? Imagine a Balor with a monk's belt.. reasonable buy within their CR 20 treasure, and their AC rises even higher.. it just doesn't make sense for such a unique ability to be given out so freely...
Magagumo 04-06-04, 11:09 PM	Wee!! Stupid network.. I didn't know any post got through, let alone two ;)
Tellish_of_Ket 04-07-04, 06:11 AM	Yeah, my final vote would be NO to both red wizard and tatoo focus. It doesn't really make sense (despite that it's not unbalancing) to have it as "core" arena. -ToK
MotherBast 04-18-04, 07:59 AM	Ok, really, these debates have stalled long enough. Since no more discussion seems to be forthcomming, I belive its time for us to vote on this. One of the "Fight Masters" should add the remaining two issues to the Elder Mod votes thread. "Should we allow Red Wizards?" "Should we "fix" allies?" The vote for what to do about allies should wait till we decide wether or not we need to do anything. No point in discussing it if we decide not to change it. If we all post a vote we can get these issues resolved in a week or two.