Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Mommy was an Orc 02-08-07, 10:07 AM	This is based on the draft - I'm going to try to go through and see how I'd tweak builds as a result of it. Tank/Charge/Weapon-Using builds - Melee Weapon Mastery and Rapid Weapon Mastery are too good at the moment to pass up. Most builds now need to have WF/WS/Weapon Mastery - that represents +3 to hit/+4 damage at a cost of 3 feats. Archery now is much more Strength dependent - levels of Barbarian and Extra Rage are going to be very common. Skill Monkeys - Beguiler 14/PrC 1 has to be on there - Beguiler wants to take 1 level of a PrC before 7th so as to push back the Advanced Learning by 1 level. Rogue 1-4/Wizard 4-1/Unseen Seer 10 is also on there as well. Heck, if Unseen Seer gets in, there might as well be no other Skill Monkey builds. Divine Casters - the lack of Divine Spellpower/DMM means that Domain Spontaneity and Domain collecting ought to become a lot more common. Druid builds are more than a little unclear. Humans are a lot more powerful as casters now as they can take multiple caster feats at 1st level. Thoughts?
Timlagor 02-08-07, 11:36 AM	"Rapid" -> "Ranged" weapon mastery? I would think this makes archery [/b]less[b] strength dependent since more damage is coming from Feats (that may be what you meant by "now") It definitely makes Fighter 4 the break point instead of 2 for anyone with extra attacks -or maybe more just because you need the Feats (not so sure for the THF guys). Combat Focus will be very interesting for Monks and Cleric-Tanks I should think but I'm not sure how much use it will see with Feats being tight in those builds and Wis13 being steep for the Fighters. Rogue10/X still rules the skills but Bequiler offer so much more -a lovely class imo. Divine Casters got some new options for their turn attempts in PHB2. I'd expect to see more of those than Domain Spontaneity myself. Sorcerors catch up a lot with Rapid Metamagic at 9th (still not as good as the 1st level variant which didn't make it into LG). Cometary Collision matches extremely well into any Shocktrooper (same requirements).
Mommy was an Orc 02-08-07, 12:06 PM	Rapid Shot and Woodland Archer are definitely inferior to Ranged Weapon Mastery. But there are potential builds that can use +10 Strength bows - arrows that do +12 damage per arrow than what current archer builds do is somewhat on the scary side. I didn't see the PHBII divine feats as all that great. The +4 to a save is nice, but that's not going to burn up a lot of turning attempts in many mods. I liked combat focus too. Really seems to synergize with Elusive Target and as Combat Defense is a Fighter bonus feat, it is possible to get both at 6th - get the ability to flatfoot both opponents in a flank manuever. "Rapid" -> "Ranged" weapon mastery? I would think this makes archery [/b]less[b] strength dependent since more damage is coming from Feats (that may be what you meant by "now") It definitely makes Fighter 4 the break point instead of 2 for anyone with extra attacks -or maybe more just because you need the Feats (not so sure for the THF guys). Rogue 10/X doesn't really rule the skills - a Rogue 1/Wizard 4/Unseen Seer 10 who starts off with an 18 Int/Human gets roughly the same number of skill points as Rogue 10/X. Except he's casting 7th level spells at the end of the build. Combat Focus will be very interesting for Monks and Cleric-Tanks I should think but I'm not sure how much use it will see with Feats being tight in those builds and Wis13 being steep for the Fighters. Rogue10/X still rules the skills but Bequiler offer so much more -a lovely class imo. Divine Casters got some new options for their turn attempts in PHB2. I'd expect to see more of those than Domain Spontaneity myself. Sorcerors catch up a lot with Rapid Metamagic at 9th (still not as good as the 1st level variant which didn't make it into LG). Cometary Collision matches extremely well into any Shocktrooper (same requirements).
jstorrie 02-08-07, 12:57 PM	One of my stupider favourite builds has become so optimized it may be cookie-cutter in a year, now. I'll tell you which on the 14th, har har. I am very happy that DMM and Divine Spellpower are gone. I am satisfied that Shock Trooper is still in. I am happy to see the Combat Focus tree in, as well, because single class monks and fighters needed some love, and combat clerics will need something to replace DMM:Quick. There may be an upswing in all-14 Pious Templar builds, now that Fighter 6 / Pious Templar 4 / x 5 can cherry-pick the best of Combat Focus and Weapon Mastery trees. I am somewhat surprised that Duskblade didn't make it in, as it's very balanced, but I can see two good reasons (too many new spells to vet, and might be too 'high magic' for Greyhawk.') Crossbow Sniper is in and will make every masochistic min-maxer happy to the point of tears. Crossbows are still terrible, but now we can at least try! The archery situation is interesting, because now Fighter 15 is as good an archer as Ranger 15. I'm interested in what will become the new cookie-cutter archer build. I am pretty much in agreement with MWaO on Unseen Seer. It will probably need to go. I would rather the arcane skillmonkey selection was just between Arcane Trickster, Rogue 1/Wizard6/Geometer/Divine Oracle/andorVirtuoso/, Beguiler, and Daggerspell, all of which are viable without being broken and different in some way.
pneumatik 02-08-07, 01:17 PM	Unseen Seer is even better than MWaO's example. You can go Scout1/Wiz4/UnSeer10. Because of how Unseen Seer advances bonus damage dice, you also have 4d6 of skirmish damage, which is definitely better (IMHO) than sneak attack or sudden strike. That being said, please let Unseer Seer stay in, Circle. I really want to play a traps arcanist for the Greyhawk core series, and Daggerspell Mage is NONC.
bitznarf 02-08-07, 01:19 PM	One of the cooler things I've seen and plan to use is to retrain Dodge to Expeditious Dodge once I can move 40 ft on my Dervish in progress. Not only does it make good mechanical sense, it also makes sense IC as well. The only problem I see with it is the possibility of not being able to use Elusive Target to its full extent at some tables. I'm hoping that I would be able to come to some sort of arrangement with those judges. Some possibilities: designate one target to 'dodge' for the purpose of Elusive Target, use Expeditious Dodge as if I had regular dodge (not in the RAW I know, but it does seem reasonable), and if all else fails, play a different character.
Timlagor 02-08-07, 01:25 PM	That being said, please let Unseer Seer stay in, Circle. I really want to play a traps arcanist for the Greyhawk core series, and Daggerspell Mage is NONC. Well around here there is a serious risk of having a full party of Beguilers -or rather squabbling about who gets to play the Beguiler(s) in the party so why not join the fun?
pneumatik 02-08-07, 01:27 PM	Well around here there is a serious risk of having a full party of Beguilers -or rather squabbling about who gets to play the Beguiler(s) in the party so why not join the fun? I hate enchanters. I know they can be really effective, but I hate them. Maybe - /maybe/ - I'll look at a gnome beguiler -> Shadowcraft Mage, but then I'd have to play a gnome, which I also hate.
Japangirl 02-08-07, 05:24 PM	Shock Trooper is terribly broken and I am sad it stayed in. It allows for full Power Attack at zero penalty to attack roll, and if you are that kind of build your AC probably is not very good anyways so the loss is not actually harmful to the character. DMM and Divine Spellpower were way less broken, DMM because of the feat investment required and Divine Spellpower because it was up to +4 CL and other than Holy Words, that means +1 AC or a few more damage dice only. I do think it is fair those two feats were removed, they are still very powerful, but to leave in Shock Trooper boggles my mind.
Mommy was an Orc 02-08-07, 05:45 PM	Shock Trooper is terribly broken and I am sad it stayed in. It allows for full Power Attack at zero penalty to attack roll, and if you are that kind of build your AC probably is not very good anyways so the loss is not actually harmful to the character. DMM and Divine Spellpower were way less broken, DMM because of the feat investment required and Divine Spellpower because it was up to +4 CL and other than Holy Words, that means +1 AC or a few more damage dice only. I do think it is fair those two feats were removed, they are still very powerful, but to leave in Shock Trooper boggles my mind. Shock Trooper isn't that great. Sure, you do a lot of damage, but if you have a DM who knows what he's doing, then only doing a single attack with it is a way to get badly, badly hurt if not killed. Someone Shock Troopers you, you Power Attack for full back. Even an AC of 18 is going to make a full Power Attack miss a couple of times a round. Not quite the same for AC 8... Where Shock Trooper causes problems is with Pounce. Pounce should be NPC only.
bitznarf 02-08-07, 06:00 PM	Shock Trooper isn't that great. Sure, you do a lot of damage, but if you have a DM who knows what he's doing, then only doing a single attack with it is a way to get badly, badly hurt if not killed. Someone Shock Troopers you, you Power Attack for full back. Even an AC of 18 is going to make a full Power Attack miss a couple of times a round. Not quite the same for AC 8... Where Shock Trooper causes problems is with Pounce. Pounce should be NPC only. Grrr. NPC only should not exist for things that cause problems in my opinion. I can see NPC only for things like Assassin and Blackguard due to the fact they they require an evil alignment, but to make something NPC only because it is broken when combined with other abilities? No. Either allow it to both PC's and NPC's or take it out all together (as they have done with DMM and DSP). Or at least thats my 2 cents. -Dale
Mommy was an Orc 02-08-07, 06:12 PM	Grrr. NPC only should not exist for things that cause problems in my opinion. I can see NPC only for things like Assassin and Blackguard due to the fact they they require an evil alignment, but to make something NPC only because it is broken when combined with other abilities? No. Either allow it to both PC's and NPC's or take it out all together (as they have done with DMM and DSP). Or at least thats my 2 cents. -Dale The problem with Pounce is that some monsters have it built into them and are useless if they don't have it(cats) - a Dire Lion can't choose to be a Polar Bear...
Mithreinmaethor 02-08-07, 06:27 PM	This is based on the draft - I'm going to try to go through and see how I'd tweak builds as a result of it. Tank/Charge/Weapon-Using builds - Melee Weapon Mastery and Rapid Weapon Mastery are too good at the moment to pass up. Most builds now need to have WF/WS/Weapon Mastery - that represents +3 to hit/+4 damage at a cost of 3 feats. Archery now is much more Strength dependent - levels of Barbarian and Extra Rage are going to be very common. Skill Monkeys - Beguiler 14/PrC 1 has to be on there - Beguiler wants to take 1 level of a PrC before 7th so as to push back the Advanced Learning by 1 level. Rogue 1-4/Wizard 4-1/Unseen Seer 10 is also on there as well. Heck, if Unseen Seer gets in, there might as well be no other Skill Monkey builds. Divine Casters - the lack of Divine Spellpower/DMM means that Domain Spontaneity and Domain collecting ought to become a lot more common. Druid builds are more than a little unclear. Humans are a lot more powerful as casters now as they can take multiple caster feats at 1st level. Thoughts? Unfortunatey the Melee Weapons Master +2/+2 doesnt stack with the Weapon Focus and Weapon Spec you already have. It just allows you to use any other weapon of (Bludg / Slash / Pierc) with +2/+2.
bitznarf 02-08-07, 06:36 PM	The problem with Pounce is that some monsters have it built into them and are useless if they don't have it(cats) - a Dire Lion can't choose to be a Polar Bear... I can see where you are coming from, however in my opinion, having the NPC's being able to use Shocktrooper/Pounce cheese while PC's cannot is just wrong.
solbergb 02-08-07, 06:41 PM	Unfortunatey the Melee Weapons Master +2/+2 doesnt stack with the Weapon Focus and Weapon Spec you already have. It just allows you to use any other weapon of (Bludg / Slash / Pierc) with +2/+2. I don't see why it woudln't stack. Both are unnamed bonuses.
Mithreinmaethor 02-08-07, 06:52 PM	I don't see why it woudln't stack. Both are unnamed bonuses. I think reading the feat itself explains that. It says you can use OTHER same typed weapons with the +2/+2 bonuses. Your weapon that you have WF and WSpec isnt an OTHER.
solbergb 02-08-07, 06:53 PM	Rapid Shot and Woodland Archer are definitely inferior to Ranged Weapon Mastery. But there are potential builds that can use +10 Strength bows - arrows that do +12 damage per arrow than what current archer builds do is somewhat on the scary side. Did we get access to +10 str bows somewhere in the LGCS? I don't remember seeing anything beyond the +4 in the PHB, as always.
Japangirl 02-08-07, 06:54 PM	Shock Trooper isn't that great. Sure, you do a lot of damage, but if you have a DM who knows what he's doing, then only doing a single attack with it is a way to get badly, badly hurt if not killed. Someone Shock Troopers you, you Power Attack for full back. Even an AC of 18 is going to make a full Power Attack miss a couple of times a round. Not quite the same for AC 8... Where Shock Trooper causes problems is with Pounce. Pounce should be NPC only. It is also a problem for Ride-by Spirited Charge people. They do not stay next to the monster with their AC 8, so it makes no difference to them that the AC is that low. They aren't in range to get hit anyways.
Franco Un-American 02-08-07, 06:59 PM	Mithreinmaethor: No, it doesn't. I'm reading the feat right now. No where in the benefits section of either Ranged or Melee Weapon Mastery is the word 'other' used. solbergB: The composite bows don't specifically list a maximum strength modifier to damage. +4 is the highest given example, but isn't stated to be the highest possible. Thus, the core rules already permit greater than +4 mighty bows. LG now conforms to this.
Mithreinmaethor 02-08-07, 07:11 PM	Mithreinmaethor: No, it doesn't. I'm reading the feat right now. No where in the benefits section of either Ranged or Melee Weapon Mastery is the word 'other' used. solbergB: The composite bows don't specifically list a maximum strength modifier to damage. +4 is the highest given example, but isn't stated to be the highest possible. Thus, the core rules already permit greater than +4 mighty bows. LG now conforms to this. Sorry its in the description of the feat itself. I will bet it gets covered in the FAQ or an errata. And I would bet it wont stack.
Franco Un-American 02-08-07, 07:16 PM	Well, the feat description has no bearing on what the feat actually does. It's the benefits that well...outline the benefits of the feat. It should stack, and does stack, until a FAQ or errata says otherwise.
Timlagor 02-08-07, 07:18 PM	I'd be astonished if they made it not stack. "now extends to other" is very far from exclusive and is only 'flavour text' anyway. The "Benefit" section is very clear and gives no basis to suppose that it doesn't apply to the weapon you have the WS in.
Mommy was an Orc 02-08-07, 08:41 PM	Sorry its in the description of the feat itself. I will bet it gets covered in the FAQ or an errata. And I would bet it wont stack. What you're in essence saying is: I take WF in Greatsword I take WS in Greatsword I take Melee Weapon Mastery I then get +1 to hit/+2 damage in Greatsword and +2 to hit/+2 damage to every other slashing weapon. That doesn't make sense.
Mithreinmaethor 02-08-07, 10:19 PM	What you're in essence saying is: I take WF in Greatsword I take WS in Greatsword I take Melee Weapon Mastery I then get +1 to hit/+2 damage in Greatsword and +2 to hit/+2 damage to every other slashing weapon. That doesn't make sense. Yes its what I am saying. As I said I could be wrong and I think that the +2 to hit was a misprint. But now that its finally open to us in LG there will be enough people bugging them about it we might see what they have to say about it. To the feat is allowing you to take the benefits of WF and WSpec with any weapon od the desribed type. But time will tell.
solbergb 02-09-07, 05:05 PM	M - you're wrong. You get +3 to hit and +4 damage on your good weapon, +2/+2 on everything else. What is making you think these don't stack? There isn't anything in the rules to indicate that, the bonuses are unnamed, so they stack. Andy - Maybe. I'd sure like to see a positive statement on this rather than a vacuum, or I'm going to have to deal with pointless arguments with DM's if I get such a bow without campaign documentation. All I can see is SRD, which doesn't give an example. If the PHB table lists four bows (+1, +2, +3, +4) then that's all we have permission to buy - the access it to what is on the table, not anything else theoretically possible. (See "potion of enlarge person, must buy at caster level 5" "wand of heightened ray of enefeeblement" etc)
Mommy was an Orc 02-09-07, 05:52 PM	Andy - Maybe. I'd sure like to see a positive statement on this rather than a vacuum, or I'm going to have to deal with pointless arguments with DM's if I get such a bow without campaign documentation. All I can see is SRD, which doesn't give an example. If the PHB table lists four bows (+1, +2, +3, +4) then that's all we have permission to buy - the access it to what is on the table, not anything else theoretically possible. (See "potion of enlarge person, must buy at caster level 5" "wand of heightened ray of enefeeblement" etc) The PHB says nothing about maximum strength bonus bows. It merely has a "For instance, a composite longbow (+1 Str bonus) costs 200 gp, while a composite longbow (+4 Str bonus) costs 500 gp." It used to be that way in 3.0, it is no longer. There's nothing on any table to indicate otherwise. Britt's said several things on the subject.
Timlagor 02-09-07, 09:44 PM	Britt's said several things on the subject. Does that mean that it's going to be clarified in the final version? Did he say which way it would go if so?
Britt 02-09-07, 09:49 PM	It's not necessary. There is no implicit or explicit limitation on the STR bonus for composite bows. The only statement is that each STR modifier bonus costs an additional 100 GP.
Timlagor 02-09-07, 09:58 PM	It's not necessary. There is no implicit or explicit limitation on the STR bonus for composite bows. The only statement is that each STR modifier bonus costs an additional 100 GP. True but it would be hlpeful (maybe int he FAQ section -still looking at that btw but it is clear that you've thought hard about it already, so I apologise for my reflex comment on it). DC would be another good (better?) place for it. It's not that there is anything in the rules to make people believe it but just that it has been a rule in LG for so long (since the beginning?).