I'd like to see what everyone is doing about dragonmarks. How are you guys handling it? Any good houserules been talked about yet?
Dragonmarks as feats, FR Spell plague style multiclass feats, racial feat substations, rituals without component costs, powers activated by action points and now magical tattoos (-wondrous item) where all options discussed in past threads.
That seems to cover the spectrum. My money is on multiclass feat ala Spell Scarred.
I'd allow players access to aberrant dragonmarks (spellscarred multiclass).
If someone wanted to have a real dragonmark, I'd probably go with a feat that grants a permanent hand-slot item. Depending on the mark, you get a +2 power bonus to a specific skill, as well as an extra Daily ability (a ritual with no cost and shortened casting time, doesn't count as an 'item Daily' power). At higher levels, they could take 'Lesser' and 'Greater' dragonmark feats, each granting an additional uses of the previous feats, a new Daily, and increase the skill bonus by +2.
Siberys dragonmark...well, that's a bit beyond me as of right now. (^_^')
I *LOVE* the idea of stealing the Spellscared from FR to become the Aberrant Dragonmarks. That's a perfect fit IMHO and I think the future Eberron marks will go that path as well.
My Daine rip-off (well, not entierly as he does have the Mark of Sentinal) agreed to "Daily power, get +1 to all defenses for 3 rounds".
We agreed that if we felt they were lacking (which I kinda think that they might be, but i'll have to talk to my players) that they would be revised. Oh, all require the expenditure of a feat.
10. Hahlo’s House: Although small, this Jorasco
house of healing can handle most problems. Thanks
to his dragonmark, Hahlo d’Jorasco can perform
Cure Disease, Raise Dead, or Remove Affliction
rituals—although he adds a 20% “Droaam tax” to
his prices unless he likes the clients.
So will dragonmarks represent faster, cheaper versions of rituals?
So will dragonmarks represent faster, cheaper versions of rituals?
Nice catch.
In that case I wonder about the ritual-skill-checks too, does the dragonmark use is an automatic maximum skill in rituals that require them?
Plus, this would work well with the idea of dragonmarked houses....they make money off the marks. Of course it would be beneficial monetarily for the marks not to have a cost...but possibly a taxation on the user (healing surge use perhaps? One surge for the use and size of the mark?) One feat could get one the dragonmark, and upon reaching a certain level, the dragonmark would automatically grow. I don't know; it sounds balanced to me.
Anyways, I was just thinking that this concerns me a bit. I can think of two ways to implement this. 1) Retcon it. Say that Dragonmarks were never associated with any specific races and they sort of all appeared at random. 2) Say that they started with specific races and they spread somehow ... like a rash or something. Maybe in the year 998 people's Dragonmarks were shuffled and redealt. You know, with Gnomes running around screaming because Marks of Shadow have suddenly seared their faces.
That's what I'd love to see. The Lord of Blades accidentally develop the Mark of Healing.
Thoughts?
Yours,
Lord Dreadman
I think I read the same thing and am equally mystified where I read it though personally I hope not. I like the order that goes along with the houses broken down by where they racially manifested.
Yeah changing this would ruin it for me I liked how the houses and dragonmarks were done, ahh if they are doing this just more sadness for me.
Or maybe I've been huffing too much Tang and thought all this up.
The idea is that the PC's are truly something special and that they have been chosen by the Draconic Prophecy (which is getting more air-time in 4e) to have some very important ramifications upon the world. Of course being a human with the Mark of Shadows might not necessarily be a good thing. When you share the mark with a house of assassins it mightn't be so...
*the sound of padded footsteps and a muffled choking is heard*
I know I read somewhere that Dragonmarks would be less connected to specific races in 4E. I really cannot recall where. Maybe you know and can enlighten me.
Anyways, I was just thinking that this concerns me a bit. I can think of two ways to implement this. 1) Retcon it. Say that Dragonmarks were never associated with any specific races and they sort of all appeared at random. 2) Say that they started with specific races and they spread somehow ... like a rash or something. Maybe in the year 998 people's Dragonmarks were shuffled and redealt. You know, with Gnomes running around screaming because Marks of Shadow have suddenly seared their faces.
That's what I'd love to see. The Lord of Blades accidentally develop the Mark of Healing.
Thoughts?
Yours,
Lord Dreadman
I think Keith said they would talk about how other races could (in your game)
get Dragonmarks and how that would radically change how life is for the PC. The Houses may come after the PC or other power groups. I like the idea. Though it does not have to be in a book for a DM to use the concept it is never a bad thing to include new ways on how to run a game, especially for the novice
Eberron has always about the PCs and not the NPCs like some other campaign settings were made out to be. I think the Campaign book is going to readdress this concept.
Tieflings could be part of any of the present human families (I'm thinking cannith) just like half-orcs are part of Tharask.
Dragonborns instead could have abilities related to dragonmarks. For example, in my group, I decided that Dragonborns where created by the dragons to study the prophecy in places that required more eyes and less size than they had. So they can, among other posible things, smell the prophecy. Literally. Their scent can detect strong manifestations of the Prophecy.
I told my Dragonborn Fighter PC that he could smell people's dragonmark and that the day of mourning a powerful scent of death knocked him down. Oh, and the fact that he doesn't really know why he has that power is also very cool :P
And I think Eladrins can live without dragonmarks, but if they can't, maybe the mark of death is not as gone from the cosmos as it is from Eberron.
I know I read somewhere that Dragonmarks would be less connected to specific races in 4E. I really cannot recall where. Maybe you know and can enlighten me.
Anyways, I was just thinking that this concerns me a bit. I can think of two ways to implement this. 1) Retcon it. Say that Dragonmarks were never associated with any specific races and they sort of all appeared at random. 2) Say that they started with specific races and they spread somehow ... like a rash or something. Maybe in the year 998 people's Dragonmarks were shuffled and redealt. You know, with Gnomes running around screaming because Marks of Shadow have suddenly seared their faces.
That's what I'd love to see. The Lord of Blades accidentally develop the Mark of Healing.
Thoughts?
Yours,
Lord Dreadman
I believe that came from a WotC paper from GenCon last year; basically a summary of a discussion about Eberron due out in the upcoming year, & what changes were in store for it
I believe that came from a WotC paper from GenCon last year; basically a summary of a discussion about Eberron due out in the upcoming year, & what changes were in store for it
Oh thank you, I've been trying to remember what that was from for weeks. I finally found it thanks to you mentioning Gencon. Here is a link for anyone else who is interested.