Post/Author/DateTime	Post
kjenks 07-26-05, 01:40 PM	Now that the Spikes spell (CD) is on the Restricted list (per the latest Dispel Confusion article), can our characters please change which weapon is selected for the Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization feats? The LGCS says that we can't change our characters in response to FAQ rule changes, but this change came from the campaign, so it would be a campaign decision to allow a change in weapon feats.
scon40 07-26-05, 05:06 PM	No, you cannot change feats in response to the restriction of the Spikes spell.
Timlagor 07-27-05, 12:39 AM	The rules say no and you are very unlikely to get any sympathy.
TimRat 07-28-05, 07:42 PM	like steven said no change can be made b/c of this
kjenks 07-28-05, 09:47 PM	Is there any mechanism to change these feats? My Triad says they can't do it with a Special Mission.
heirodule 07-29-05, 12:02 PM	:rolleyes: Get hit by level draining udead until the levels that had the feats are gone. Then either pay for restorations or earn XP back up again. Sounds fair to me :cool:
Drezden 07-29-05, 02:19 PM	Pretty typical LG decision - change the rules midstream, not allow a character to adjust his build made under the prior, valid rules. The really annoying part is that Spikes is not a new spell - it has been around a while. Surely, the Circle knew the potential abuse of Spikes at the last revision of the LGCS/Complete Book Revision, yet chose NOT to restrict it. This signalled the player base that Spikes was ok. Players chose to make builds to take advantage of Spikes. Now, years after the spell is out, the Circle decides Spikes is broken and the players who relied on the earlier Circle decision are stuck. Nice. If Spikes were new and the Circle didn't have time to properly judge whether it was broken (Quill Blast and (the next probable banned spell) Wraithstrike), that would be fine. But spikes was not new. If the FAQ was such a problem, ban brambles instead. Changing the rules in midstream and forcing players to abide by builds built under the earlier rules just isn't right. I am sure many LG players will simply change their feats on their own. Daren
kjenks 07-29-05, 02:40 PM	I am sure many LG players will simply change their feats on their own. Daren I'm not going to cheat. I just want to know how the campaign rules will allow us to deal with this situation. A couple of sentences in the next Dispel Confusion article specifically allowing a change in weapons would be ideal. Something like this: "Because of recent changes in campaign rules, characters who have selected the Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Greater Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Specialization and Improved Critical feats in club, greatclub, quarterstaff, nunchaku or maul, or who have selected Exotic Weapon Proficiency (maul), may change the weapon specified by these feats, recording this new selection on the character's next AR, and having this selection initialed by the GM. The character may not select new feats, but may select a different weapon for these existing feats. This selection must be made by the end of calendar year 2005." That would solve my problem nicely without much fuss.
Sieylianna 07-29-05, 05:21 PM	Pretty typical LG decision - change the rules midstream, not allow a character to adjust his build made under the prior, valid rules. The really annoying part is that Spikes is not a new spell - it has been around a while. Surely, the Circle knew the potential abuse of Spikes at the last revision of the LGCS/Complete Book Revision, yet chose NOT to restrict it. This signalled the player base that Spikes was ok. Players chose to make builds to take advantage of Spikes. Plenty of people pointed out that Spikes was broken during the player comment period for the last LGCS, but the Circle decided not to restrict it at that time. Part of my LG philosophy is not to rely on any specific Spell, Feat or Prestige Class for this exact reason. First, they can go away at the whim of the campaign staff. Second, unless it's black and white, you're subject to an individual DM's ruling on how it works. Flexibility is good for survival. Ed
SteveMND 07-31-05, 12:34 PM	Ed's quite correct, IMHO. Many people online and on the various lists -- of which Ken is a member -- brought up the potential for abuse of that spell, and numerous people also stated that it would only be a matter of time before something was done about it. It is always a dangerous gamble to focus a character entirely around a single trick, especially if you are well aware that there is a lot of concern about the continued legitimacy of that particular trick. Spikes was certainly an obvious example of such a foci. Besides, if you are petitioning for such a strong change as you are, you are saying is that basically, your character's efficiency was based completely and solely around the use of a single spell from a non-Core source being made available at any particular table, and without that spell, your character is useless without retooling him. That's a pretty big claim, and not one that most people are going to agree with.
kjenks 07-31-05, 01:38 PM	You're reading too much into this simple request for fairness. The Circle knew -- or should have known -- all about the Spikes spell long before the 595 Conversion. This spell has been around for a long time. Now that they restricted it, they might decide that it's only fair to allow some small manner of adjustment, like allowing a weapon specialist to change specialization, or to allow a character who crafted wands or scrolls of this spell to get reimbursed for the XP and GP value. It's their choice to make this kind of adjustment, but it probably won't happen unless someone requests it. That's what I'm doing. I'm going through channels and obeying the rules. For this one character, these are only two feats out of 22. My character's primary weapon is a lance; the greatclub is only used when my character must get in close. That's not building a character around a single spell. But this question should not be about any single character. It should be about what's right and fair for the campaign. The Circle banned the spell. Now we are discussing how they want to deal with the consequences of that action. Perhaps if they receive a reasonable request for limited action, they'll make a reasonable response.
Sieylianna 07-31-05, 05:37 PM	But this question should not be about any single character. It should be about what's right and fair for the campaign. The Circle banned the spell. Now we are discussing how they want to deal with the consequences of that action. Perhaps if they receive a reasonable request for limited action, they'll make a reasonable response. Except the Circle has a long history of changing how feats work and not allowing the player to change his feat. Take the magic item creation feats in year 2. Take the leadership feat in year 3. The players weren't allowed to swap feats to compensate in those instances, all they could do is wait until the 3.5 conversion allowed the PC to be rebuilt. Ed
kjenks 07-31-05, 05:58 PM	I'm not asking to change feats, only the weapon specified by those feats, since that weapon is no longer very useful. Perhaps the Circle will allow this limited change, if asked politely.
RLWilde 08-01-05, 03:58 AM	Except the Circle has a long history of changing how feats work and not allowing the player to change his feat. Take the magic item creation feats in year 2. Take the leadership feat in year 3. The players weren't allowed to swap feats to compensate in those instances, all they could do is wait until the 3.5 conversion allowed the PC to be rebuilt. Even the 3.5 conversion didn't help much as far as those rules changes... While Leadership was finally treated like any other feat, characters who took MIC feats were still stuck with them.
Sieylianna 08-01-05, 07:34 AM	Even the 3.5 conversion didn't help much as far as those rules changes... While Leadership was finally treated like any other feat, characters who took MIC feats were still stuck with them. IIRC, you were only stuck with them if you had used them in year 2 to "craft gold", but I don't have the conversion document here. Ed
SteveMND 08-02-05, 11:13 AM	I'm not asking to change feats, only the weapon specified by those feats, since that weapon is no longer very useful. First off, Weapon Focus: Greatclub and Weapon Focus: rapier are two completely different feats -- one has zero impact on the other. And secondly, Your assumption that the greatclub is no longer very useful is where, I suspect, your petition will fail (or rather, has failed). A greatclub is just as useful today as it was last week, two months ago, or five years ago. The only difference is that a spell that could buff it has been removed -- and a spell that was from a non-Core source at that. That has zero impact on the greatclub's usefulness as a weapon. Had the actual weapon been changed -- say, dropping its damage down to 1d6 or some other such thing -- then yeah, your argument would have far more weight to it. But the weapon itself has been untouched, and Focus and Specialization provide the exact same benefit as they did previously. "That's not building a character around a single spell" Well, IMHO, if the lack of a spell is so significant as to make you feel it necessary to retool your character because he has dropped so much in effectiveness, then yeah, you did build him around that single spell. If you didn't build him around that, then the loss of a single non-Core buff spell should be of relatively minimal impact to begin with.
Casebier 08-07-05, 02:29 PM	IIRC, you were only stuck with them if you had used them in year 2 to "craft gold", but I don't have the conversion document here. Ed 595 CY Conversion.pdf (bolded a couple things to make a point): PCs with magic item creation feats must keep those feats (with the exception of Create Infusion, which is removed from the campaign), as well as any other prerequisites the character needs to make the items that they have previosly created. If you did not use the feat to make money in the year two MIC system, to make an item, or you did not use it to upgrade a signature item in year 2, you may remove it during conversion. If you remove all levels of wizard you do not have to keep the Scribe Scroll feat even if it was used. So the three reasons why you wouldn't be allowed to lose the feat are mentioned here. The first and third specify year two, but the second reason doesn't specify a specific year. If it had specified year two, I would have gotten rid of my Scribe Scroll feat which I took upon quickly converting from 3.0 to 3.5 and haven't used since the beginning of 2004. John Jr