Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Banatine 09-03-07, 05:15 PM	This is an attempt to mimic the Mortal Draw ability from the Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. Enjoy. :D MORTAL DRAW [GENERAL] By leaving yourself completely open to attack, your opponent decides to send you to an early grave. Little does he know that you are simply waiting. Waiting for him to let down his guard, so that you can return the favour. Prerequisites: Base Attack Bonus +16, Combat Focus, Combat Strike, Combat Reflexes, Deathblow, Fade into Violence, Mercurial Strike*, Quick Draw. Benefits: If an opponent attacks you while you are maintaining your combat focus, and wearing no armour or light armour and carrying nothing in your hands, you may expend your combat focus to suddenly lauch a deadly counter attack while its guard is down. Resolve this as an attack of opportunity. In addition, if your attack successfully hits and deals at least 1 point of damage, you opponent must make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + damage dealt by the attack) or die. Creatures immune to critical hits are also immune to the mortal draw. If you use the mortal draw against an opponent who is immune to critical hits, your combat focus is still expended, but the attack is resolved as normal. *Dragon Compendium.
Khadmus 09-03-07, 05:21 PM	An attack of opportunity...with an unarmed strike? Quick Draw is a free action, not an immediate action. Is Deathblow that "CdG as a standard action" feat?
Banatine 09-03-07, 05:55 PM	An attack of opportunity...with an unarmed strike? Quick Draw is a free action, not an immediate action. Is Deathblow that "CdG as a standard action" feat? Tht is where the Mercurial Strike feat comes in. It allows you to draw a weapon to make an attack of opportunity when you are unarmed. The opponent is also flat-footed for the attack. I knew i should have said what the feat does. Also, Deathblow is the 'CdG as a standard action' feat.
Samotep 09-03-07, 06:13 PM	Tht is where the Mercurial Strike feat comes in. It allows you to draw a weapon to make an attack of opportunity when you are unarmed. The opponent is also flat-footed for the attack. I knew i should have said what the feat does. Also, Deathblow is the 'CdG as a standard action' feat. The problem I see is that just because they are flat-footed, doesn't mean that they are helpless, making CdG impossible. Maybe you could make it an assassin ability/feat. Don't they get a standard attack like that? Of course, if you are playing a fighter that is made specifically for this feat, he could gain this ability about 6th level (not counting possible BAB reqs.) I that a fair assessment? I, personally wouldn't want anyone under 12th level to be able to do that. But that is one man's opinion :D
deathbane 09-03-07, 06:15 PM	What if several opponents attack you? Do you get to try to kill all of them, and if it is only used against one of them, then how do you determine which one gets the death attack?
Banatine 09-03-07, 07:06 PM	What if several opponents attack you? Do you get to try to kill all of them, and if it is only used against one of them, then how do you determine which one gets the death attack? You cannot use Mortal Draw more than once per encounter, because using it requires you to expend your combat focus. (combat focus is a state you can enter after you have acquired the combat focus feat where you get several bonuses baced on how many combat form feats you have. you may only enter combat focus once per encounter.) about the second point, you would obviously get to pick who you attack. not all of your opponents will attack at exactly tyhe same time, and is some unusual circumstance makes that the case, you are allowed to pick The problem I see is that just because they are flat-footed, doesn't mean that they are helpless, making CdG impossible. Maybe you could make it an assassin ability/feat. Don't they get a standard attack like that? Of course, if you are playing a fighter that is made specifically for this feat, he could gain this ability about 6th level (not counting possible BAB reqs.) I that a fair assessment? I, personally wouldn't want anyone under 12th level to be able to do that. But that is one man's opinion Exactly my point. This feat basically allows you to make a coup de grace attack when your opponent is not helpless, by attacking them when they let their defences down because they attack you when they think you are helpless. Just in case you don't know, Here is a video and explanation of the mortal draw in action! (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=o_sIxZjBims)
deathbane 09-03-07, 10:58 PM	You cannot use Mortal Draw more than once per encounter, because using it requires you to expend your combat focus. (combat focus is a state you can enter after you have acquired the combat focus feat where you get several bonuses baced on how many combat form feats you have. you may only enter combat focus once per encounter.) about the second point, you would obviously get to pick who you attack. not all of your opponents will attack at exactly tyhe same time, and is some unusual circumstance makes that the case, you are allowed to pick Exactly my point. This feat basically allows you to make a coup de grace attack when your opponent is not helpless, by attacking them when they let their defences down because they attack you when they think you are helpless. Just in case you don't know, Here is a video and explanation of the mortal draw in action! (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=o_sIxZjBims) I think there should be a base attack bonus. To kill someone instantly is to powerful for a 6th level character. Even casters dot get save or die abilities until 11th level, and even then it is usually a close range or touch spell so if the opponent makes the save, then the caster and his d4 are in trouble. A fighter who does this can take the hit from his opponent, and he still gets his full attack because the CdG was used as an attack of opportunity.
JoshuaZ 09-03-07, 11:29 PM	This should have a minimum BAB to it. Also, since it involves the opponent thinking that you are weak, I'd suggest adding a minimum number of ranks in Bluff as well, but that's less necessary.
BilopTheFleshwarper 09-04-07, 04:32 AM	Few things... 1. Despite the horrable amount of requirements a very powerful feat. 2. Easily broken, by power attack. 3. Awesome feat for my monk going thru the combat focus tree. 4. Why the light or no armor requirement? don't want real fighters to take the feat? 5. STOP TRYING TO RECREATE VIDEO GAMES AND ANIME IN D&D!!! IT PISSES ME OFF! 6. should have a minimum BAB, would suggest...18
deathbane 09-04-07, 06:22 AM	Few things... 1. Despite the horrable amount of requirements a very powerful feat. 2. Easily broken, by power attack. 3. Awesome feat for my monk going thru the combat focus tree. 4. Why the light or no armor requirement? don't want real fighters to take the feat? 5. STOP TRYING TO RECREATE VIDEO GAMES AND ANIME IN D&D!!! IT PISSES ME OFF! 6. should have a minimum BAB, would suggest...18 Now that I think about this feat should be thrown away. It is very easy to force someone to make a fort save of 30+ at around level 10, maybe even lower than level 10, and most CR 10 monster won't make that unless they roll a nat 20. Bebeliths and Fire Giants have to make a 14 and 16 respectively to make the save if some power attacking fighter managed to do a measly 20 points of damage.
Banatine 09-04-07, 06:38 AM	Few things... 1. Despite the horrable amount of requirements a very powerful feat. 2. Easily broken, by power attack. 3. Awesome feat for my monk going thru the combat focus tree. 4. Why the light or no armor requirement? don't want real fighters to take the feat? 5. STOP TRYING TO RECREATE VIDEO GAMES AND ANIME IN D&D!!! IT PISSES ME OFF! 6. should have a minimum BAB, would suggest...18 1. It is supposed to be a powerful feat, but it's really not that good. 2. What do you mean, by power attack? 3. Why is it great for a monk? Did you not see that you need to expend your combat focus to use it? And that you can only gain combat focus once per encounter? And you lose all combat focus related abilities after expending it? (actually, thinking about that, Combat Strike should be a prerequisite too.) 4. the light or no armour requirement is there because you have to look helkpless foir your opponent to let down their guard enough for it to work. Who would let down their guard going to attack a guy in full plate armour, seriously? 5. I'n sorry it annoys you, but you didn't have to read it, did you? Second, was that a comment exclusively to me, or in general? 6. I've added BAB +16. that stops most people from getting it too quickly.
Radijs 09-04-07, 07:26 AM	Stuff taken directly from a videogame! MY EYEBALLS! MY POOR HELPLESS EYEBALLS! A death attack wrapped into a single feat? No, thats too much. I can see it now, True strike active, full power attack and then strike with a two-handed weapon. Its pretty much a guaranteed death to whoever happens to attack first. Especially with a DC of 10+damage dealt.
deathbane 09-04-07, 07:51 AM	1. It is supposed to be a powerful feat, but it's really not that good. 2. What do you mean, by power attack? 3. Why is it great for a monk? Did you not see that you need to expend your combat focus to use it? And that you can only gain combat focus once per encounter? And you lose all combat focus related abilities after expending it? (actually, thinking about that, Combat Strike should be a prerequisite too.) 4. the light or no armour requirement is there because you have to look helkpless foir your opponent to let down their guard enough for it to work. Who would let down their guard going to attack a guy in full plate armour, seriously? 5. I'n sorry it annoys you, but you didn't have to read it, did you? Second, was that a comment exclusively to me, or in general? 6. I've added BAB +16. that stops most people from getting it too quickly. Remember this is not an optimized fighter. It is something I came up with in about 1 minutes or less power attack allows you to subtract from your attack BAB and add that number to damage. at level 16 We will use a long sword 1d8(used with one hand) averages out to 4 str mod assuming you got belt of giant strength +5 weapon spec. +2 melee wpn mastery +2 power attack +4 flaming/frost weapon enchantment of +2/1d6/1d6 averages out ti 8 4+5+2+2+4+8=25+10(because it is a CdG)=35 DC CR 16 Monsters Horned Devil has a +16 meaning it would need a 19 to survive CR 17 Marilith(general of Demon armies) +19 needs a 16 to survive Mature adult bronze dragon +19 need a 16 to survive CR18 Mature adult red dragon +18 needs a 17 to survive CR 20 Balor(general of armies and right below demon princes in power +22 needs a 13 Pit Fiend(Leader of Devils) +19 needs a 16 to survive CR 23 Solar +18 needs a 17, an epic level encounter having a 50% chance of dieing because of one hit it takes from a level 16 character is not good
Cifer 09-04-07, 08:25 AM	As Deathbane said, the saves get too high too fast - and his build is hardly optimized for dealing damage. Following the suggestions of others, put in a True Strike, use a twohanded weapon and Powerattack for the maximum (probably 16) - that's a save DC 28 points higher than he calculated. Of course that's only once per encounter, but it's enough to shred any BBEG that is not immune to... wait, the feat doesn't even say that it would be useless against stuff immune to crits.
deathbane 09-04-07, 08:35 AM	As Deathbane said, the saves get too high too fast - and his build is hardly optimized for dealing damage. Following the suggestions of others, put in a True Strike, use a twohanded weapon and Powerattack for the maximum (probably 16) - that's a save DC 28 points higher than he calculated. Of course that's only once per encounter, but it's enough to shred any BBEG that is not immune to... wait, the feat doesn't even say that it would be useless against stuff immune to crits. Well by definition of CdG, and certain monster invurnabilities it won't work against all monster. Hopefully the DM should know that it wont work against undead, constructs, oozes, and whatever else falls into this category. As you stated, and that statement was something I was hinting towards, that it is to easy to kill the BBEG with this feat. I will also state once again that it is not fair to get a death blow in, and still get your full attack in, even if the DC was lower.
Radijs 09-04-07, 08:52 AM	Lets see, BBEG encoutner approaches. Your wizard buddy ports you next to the BBEG (say with dimension door.) You do your mojo, BBEG is practically guaranteed to be dead.
Banatine 09-04-07, 09:12 AM	Deathbane: Don't all of the creatures you used as examples have at least DR 10? Ok, granted your example has already beaten the bronze dragons DR, but your party needs a pretty damn good reason for attacking a chromatic dragon. Other points regarding your monster choces: Why hasn't the Solar just shot a slaying arrow at you? Why are any of them engaging you in close combat within your reach? are you not lucky to hit most of them anyway (the avarage AC of those monsters is about 35)? Also, mortal draw would not work on anyone who is immune to criticals, i'll put that in.
JoshuaZ 09-04-07, 12:53 PM	The save being too high does seem like a valid criticism. I'd suggest adjusting it so that the save DC is the minimum of 10 + damage dealt and your BAB . That way the save can't get too high too fast.
Tempest Stormwind 09-04-07, 01:42 PM	I looked at that and saw it as iaijutsu focus -- or more accurately, any of the Diamond Mind maneuvers that require a concentration check. It just required you to draw your weapon as part of it, and (mimicking your inability to dodge without Z-targeting) provoked attacks of opportunity. It likely had a full-round initiation time in the game, given that it was a slow swing and it required a fair bit of setup/followthrough. The reason it insta-kills is NOT because it's an instant-death technique but rather because it deals hella damage (like, Diamond Nightmare Blade damage). It's possible to trigger the move against foes it shouldn't be able to kill, actually (armored darknuts come to mind; every boss you fight after you get it except some of Zant's forms are also capable of evading it by virtue of the environment), although all of them are fast enough to interrupt it or evade it so you never see it connect. Don't take the Hero's Spirit's words too literally; he often embellishes techniques' usefulness to make them sound more dramatic than they actually are (the shield bash in particular). You want Twilight Princess? Link there is literally dripping ranger/warblade. If you look at ranger/warblade, it fits him so perfectly that you have to think *real* hard to find anything you'd need homebrew material for (aside from equipment). The secret skills in particular are always cited as stellar examples of warblade techniques. That said, if you *insist* on replicating Mortal Draw, and *insist* on replicating it as a feat instead of a maneuver (when it obviously *is* a maneuver...), just say that you can draw a sheathed weapon and attack with it as a full-round action that provokes AoOs; if it hits, it's an automatic critical hit, but if you're hit, the attack automatically misses. That said, I'd still suggest a Nightmare Blade instead. Recall that when you're "replicating" stuff from a video game, you're NOT looking to directly copy it. You're looking to replicate it in D&D, and as such it must be designed with D&D's rules in mind. (Example: A friend of mine managed to replicate a technique from Naruto in which one character attacks 128 times in the blink of an eye with an attack that damages an opponent in critical points. He did this by devising a method to dish out 128d6 damage in one round via Dissipating Touch, describing each d6 as a strike. It was balanced for the cost of pulling it off. If it involved 128 separate attacks, however, it no doubt would *not* have been balanced in D&D, and it would have been monotonous to roll.)
deathbane 09-04-07, 05:48 PM	Deathbane: Don't all of the creatures you used as examples have at least DR 10? Ok, granted your example has already beaten the bronze dragons DR, but your party needs a pretty damn good reason for attacking a chromatic dragon. Other points regarding your monster choces: Why hasn't the Solar just shot a slaying arrow at you? Why are any of them engaging you in close combat within your reach? are you not lucky to hit most of them anyway (the avarage AC of those monsters is about 35)? Also, mortal draw would not work on anyone who is immune to criticals, i'll put that in. They don't have damage reduction 10/-, and like I said my fighter was not optimized. If I did that I could do more than 35 damage, and with the +10 from CdG the DC goes up to 45 so the save is still at least 35, and as far as the dragon comment, I just picked one of a similar CR. I could have picked an evil dragon if I wanted to, and it would have had the same effect, and it does not negate the fact that he could one-shot a dragon. Tumble could get you in close to the monster, and I am sure there are other ways to get close if you really want to, and 35 AC is not hard to hit at level 16. The level 16 NPC fighter in the DMG has a +23 to hit. I am sure most people can do better than the NPC in the DMG. The slaying arrow is only a DC 20, not that they should be fighting solars, but the point is no feat should allow you kill something more powerful than you with one hit, and you can't deliver CdG's to creatures that are immune to critical hits anyway. That is in the Phb
deathbane 09-04-07, 05:51 PM	The save being too high does seem like a valid criticism. I'd suggest adjusting it so that the save DC is the minimum of 10 + damage dealt and your BAB . That way the save can't get too high too fast. That would actually make the DC higher, not lower CdG+Damage+BAB 10+25+16=51
Ranton 09-04-07, 06:00 PM	Just make the Save DC = 10 + Character Level / 2 + Str Modifier. There are alot of other feats that give similar DCs, and it doesnt spiral out of control. At 20th level you are looking at about a 30 DC Fortitude Save.
deathbane 09-04-07, 06:04 PM	That said, if you *insist* on replicating Mortal Draw, and *insist* on replicating it as a feat instead of a maneuver (when it obviously *is* a maneuver...), just say that you can draw a sheathed weapon and attack with it as a full-round action that provokes AoOs; if it hits, it's an automatic critical hit, but if you're hit, the attack automatically misses. That said, I'd still suggest a Nightmare Blade instead. That idea might work, but it does not fit the flavor of what he wants to do. The best thing that would fit is something like the monk or assassins DC formula where you add 10+1/2character level+X mod bonus, but since he wants it as an attack of opportunity, which allows him to still get a full round in something would have to be sacrificed to balance that out. The nonoptimised fighter I used in my other post would have a DC of 24 using strength as the modifier which would have the monsters rolling between an 8 and maybe 13 to survive. I did not do the math for the save this time, just an estimate.
Khadmus 09-04-07, 06:23 PM	Why are people in medium/heavy armor threatening-looking? They're unarmed, after all. Furthermore, since they are wearing armor, they probably aren't monks.
Tempest Stormwind 09-04-07, 07:42 PM	That would actually make the DC higher, not lower CdG+Damage+BAB 10+25+16=51 No, see, you're reading that as "minimum save DC 10+damage+bab", when really, his quote (namely "10 + damage dealt and your BAB") is equivalent to min(10+dmg, bab). In other words, DC 16 in this case (since his base attack is the minimum on those two). I think it's too complex, myself. That idea might work, but it does not fit the flavor of what he wants to do. The best thing that would fit is something like the monk or assassins DC formula where you add 10+1/2character level+X mod bonus, but since he wants it as an attack of opportunity, which allows him to still get a full round in something would have to be sacrificed to balance that out. The nonoptimised fighter I used in my other post would have a DC of 24 using strength as the modifier which would have the monsters rolling between an 8 and maybe 13 to survive. I did not do the math for the save this time, just an estimate. No, see, he was looking to replicate Mortal Draw in D&D. What he gave us was an overpowered Death Attack variant. Mortal Draw is an insta-kill in Twilight Princess, but only because it deals mega damage, roughly quadruple what a jump attack would. There's a few monsters that can survive that many jump attacks (i.e. damage equates to loss of armor rather than loss of life, or bosses who switch forms after X amount of damage), but against those monsters the effect is hidden because you can't successfully perform the mortal draw against them for assorted reasons. I still think it's best reflected with the Nightmare Blade maneuvers, made with the modifications I mentioned above (namely, full-round and provokes AoOs, can be interrupted). Really, that's all you need for it. This also works out with a better result -- recall that the only reason Mortal Draw's as fun as it is in Zelda is because monsters are almost never alone, and because there are no insta-player-killing attacks (i.e. monsters can't learn Mortal Draw). If he supports the mechanics here over the concept, then he may as well be using the concept to push the argument for a death attack, as opposed to modelling Mortal Draw.
deathbane 09-04-07, 08:55 PM	No, see, you're reading that as "minimum save DC 10+damage+bab", when really, his quote (namely "10 + damage dealt and your BAB") is equivalent to min(10+dmg, bab). In other words, DC 16 in this case (since his base attack is the minimum on those two). I think it's too complex, myself. So he is saying 10 + damage, or BAB (whichever one is smaller) I think that BAB is to small to use as a fort save? You are right it is to complicated. No, see, he was looking to replicate Mortal Draw in D&D. What he gave us was an overpowered Death Attack variant. Mortal Draw is an insta-kill in Twilight Princess, but only because it deals mega damage, roughly quadruple what a jump attack would. There's a few monsters that can survive that many jump attacks (i.e. damage equates to loss of armor rather than loss of life, or bosses who switch forms after X amount of damage), but against those monsters the effect is hidden because you can't successfully perform the mortal draw against them for assorted reasons. I still think it's best reflected with the Nightmare Blade maneuvers, made with the modifications I mentioned above (namely, full-round and provokes AoOs, can be interrupted). Really, that's all you need for it. This also works out with a better result -- recall that the only reason Mortal Draw's as fun as it is in Zelda is because monsters are almost never alone, and because there are no insta-player-killing attacks (i.e. monsters can't learn Mortal Draw). If he supports the mechanics here over the concept, then he may as well be using the concept to push the argument for a death attack, as opposed to modelling Mortal Draw. I read the nightmare blade. It makes more sense, does an insane amount of damage, while still giving the monster a chance to live.
StruckingFuggle 09-04-07, 10:16 PM	You want Twilight Princess? Link there is literally dripping ranger/warblade. If you look at ranger/warblade, it fits him so perfectly that you have to think *real* hard to find anything you'd need homebrew material for (aside from equipment). The secret skills in particular are always cited as stellar examples of warblade techniques. Most of the time in Twilight Princess, Link looks pretty dry to me... (to the point: I'm harping on your use of "literally" to mean "strongly" when it's clearly a figurative statement instead of one that's literal). (Example: A friend of mine managed to replicate a technique from Naruto in which one character attacks 128 times in the blink of an eye with an attack that damages an opponent in critical points. He did this by devising a method to dish out 128d6 damage in one round via Dissipating Touch, describing each d6 as a strike. It was balanced for the cost of pulling it off. If it involved 128 separate attacks, however, it no doubt would *not* have been balanced in D&D, and it would have been monotonous to roll.) ... and then after which, I have the gall to ask if you could illustrate for us how someone pulled off the Double Eight Trigrams Sixty-Four Palms taijutsu in D&D? I think there should be a base attack bonus. To kill someone instantly is to powerful for a 6th level character. Even casters dot get save or die abilities until 11th level, and even then it is usually a close range or touch spell so if the opponent makes the save, then the caster and his d4 are in trouble. A fighter who does this can take the hit from his opponent, and he still gets his full attack because the CdG was used as an attack of opportunity. Effectively, if not by the definition most people use, it's arguable that Wizards and Sorcerors have had "save or die" spells since level 1, rather than Level 11. Color Spray, Sleep, Sleep upgrades, Hold Person ... in dnd, helplessness can be fatal before your next action even if the effect causing it doesn't instantly kill you.
ff6shadow 09-04-07, 11:41 PM	Here is the post for pulling off the Double Eight Trigrams Sixty-Four Palms. Edit: Can't beleive I forgot to actually place the link in the post. Tempest already got it though.
Tempest Stormwind 09-04-07, 11:47 PM	Most of the time in Twilight Princess, Link looks pretty dry to me... (to the point: I'm harping on your use of "literally" to mean "strongly" when it's clearly a figurative statement instead of one that's literal). Zora Armor aside, I should have said "veritably." ... and then after which, I have the gall to ask if you could illustrate for us how someone pulled off the Double Eight Trigrams Sixty-Four Palms taijutsu in D&D? Or whatever they called it in localization. But yeah, here. (http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=8536504&postcount=71) I forgot the details; he does 128 in one round, but does it as part of a sequence that produces doubling results every time, just like in the manga. Parts of the preparation for 128, in some versions, show up during the earlier rounds. Effectively, if not by the definition most people use, it's arguable that Wizards and Sorcerors have had "save or die" spells since level 1, rather than Level 11. Color Spray, Sleep, Sleep upgrades, Hold Person ... in dnd, helplessness can be fatal before your next action even if the effect causing it doesn't instantly kill you. I'm very, very much aware of the horrifying power of Color Spray. However, basically doing a coup de grace *on command* without any of the necessary knockouts? Recall that save-or-dies in 3.5 tend to have low DCs. For example, my wizard is level 10 at the moment and has horribly high DCs of 19+spell level (cap of DC 24 at this point), although only for illusion spells (several of which are save-or-lose). A coup de grace from our party's warrior at this level would have a DC of... 47, assuming he rolls an average result on his damage roll. And I guess it's easier to pimp his damage than it is my spell DCs at this point.
StruckingFuggle 09-05-07, 12:07 AM	Or whatever they called it in localization. Well, it's easier to remember than the Japanese. :p I'm very, very much aware of the horrifying power of Color Spray. However, basically doing a coup de grace *on command* without any of the necessary knockouts? Recall that save-or-dies in 3.5 tend to have low DCs. I understand & agree that the save-or-dies are rather tame compared to CdG on command, and that those would have much higher DCs. I wasn't trying to dispute that - I apologize for a lack of clarity, I merely wanted to point out that Wizards get effective "save or lose" spells before 11th level as someone else said. A point I was making more or less in a vacuum, referring only to it & apart from the CdG DC discussion.
deathbane 09-05-07, 12:53 AM	Effectively, if not by the definition most people use, it's arguable that Wizards and Sorcerors have had "save or die" spells since level 1, rather than Level 11. Color Spray, Sleep, Sleep upgrades, Hold Person ... in dnd, helplessness can be fatal before your next action even if the effect causing it doesn't instantly kill you. Hold Person can be a save or die situation, but it is not save or die on it's own and the DC is a lot more makeable than your feat, and after the spell is cast the caster's turn is over. They don't get to cast spells with a DC so high that most everything will fail the save, and still keep their full round action. If you are the DM and you want this to be available to your players then give it to them, but when they smash your BBEG in round 1 dont say nobody told you not to do it, and if you are a player and your level 16 gets smacked down by the DM's NPC who is 3 levels below you, don't don't complain about that either. I really don't see why you think it is justified to think it is ok to have a save DC that high.
StruckingFuggle 09-05-07, 12:57 AM	Two things: One: You seem to be thinking that I suggested the feat ... and I didn't. That, or your language is really unclear, you switch the target of your "yous" without indication. Two: My point about first level save-or-loses stands on its own, regardless of this feat or no.
deathbane 09-05-07, 01:35 AM	Two things: One: You seem to be thinking that I suggested the feat ... and I didn't. That, or your language is really unclear, you switch the target of your "yous" without indication. Two: My point about first level save-or-loses stands on its own, regardless of this feat or no. I thought you switched logins when you defended the feat, and your point does not stand becuase hold person does not kill on it's own, and it has a makable save, not like the instakill feat the OP posted. To the OP, in the end it is your game.
StruckingFuggle 09-05-07, 01:46 AM	and your point does not stand becuase hold person does not kill on it's own, and it has a makable save, not like the instakill feat the OP posted. First: Well yes, they don't kill on your own, which is why I switched from calling them "save-or-die" to calling them "save-or-lose". Second: If Hold Person doesn't count because "the save is makeable", then it would seem that Slay Living, Phantasmal Killer, and all other usually-called-'save-or-dies' don't count, either. Are you sure you want to make that argument? (plus, isn't that why they're called "save-or-die", not "roll-a-20-or-die" or just "you die" spells?) Third, and again for hopefully clarity & the last time: My comment on hold person, color spray, Sleep, whatever, have nothing at all to do with the feat in question here.
deathbane 09-05-07, 01:53 AM	First: Well yes, they don't kill on your own, which is why I switched from calling them "save-or-die" to calling them "save-or-lose". Second: If Hold Person doesn't count because "the save is makeable", then it would seem that Slay Living, Phantasmal Killer, and all other usually-called-'save-or-dies' don't count, either. Are you sure you want to make that argument? (plus, isn't that why they're called "save-or-die", not "roll-a-20-or-die" or just "you die" spells?) Third, and again for hopefully clarity & the last time: My comment on hold person, color spray, Sleep, whatever, have nothing at all to do with the feat in question here. The "don't account" is in comparison to the high DC of the OP's feat. I know they have merit because I have used them and/or had them used on me.
StruckingFuggle 09-05-07, 02:05 AM	...You have no idea what I'm trying to say, do you...?
deathbane 09-05-07, 09:17 AM	...You have no idea what I'm trying to say, do you...? I guess not, but it does not matter anymore. I guess the OP has made up his mind by now anyway.
Spikes01k 09-05-07, 09:35 AM	Your making the effect too powerful, obveously because you like the game a lot. May I suggest you simply make an advancment from quick draw and improved feint because that is what it looks like. P.S. Maybe something like +2-4 for feint attempts and +2-4 for confirming critical hits; and maybe add the requirement of keen or improved critical as well as a very high base attack, and maybe all an incease of crit threat range by 1 when performing this maneuver. These are just thoughts.
StruckingFuggle 09-05-07, 12:39 PM	I guess not, but it does not matter anymore. I guess the OP has made up his mind by now anyway. And that doesn't matter, because my post on low-level save-or-lose was never intended to have anything to do with the OP or with changing his mind, or changing anyone's mind one way or the other on the OP's feat. I never intended "wizards have low-level save-or-lose spells" to address any point other than to disagree with "wizards don't get save-or-dies until level 11". It was a minor derailment, I guess is how you put it, because I was only addressing and disagreeing with something else someone said in this thread. It was just, "hey, you said this thing, and I disagree with you, here's why". It was never meant to one way or the other make any point about any part of this idea for Mortal Draw.