Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Axiomatic_Badger May 11, 2010 7:59:31	I've been reading over Hellcow's rules for dragonmarks, and an Idea has occured. Does anyone here use Dragonmarks as items? To clarify, thanks to DMG2 we have a precident for item-like effects being innate to a character. From this, it doesn't seem like a leap to using a character's dragonmark as a way to award treasure, especially with wonderous items or non-combat slotted items, such as Woundstitch Powder or Keoghtom's Ointment for the mark of Healing, or Hedge Wizard's Gloves for the mark of Making, or even a set of Summoned Platemail for the mark of Sentinel. It seems this would be a good way to make dragonmarks more powerful/explain the houses' power for those not fond of houserules.
#2 Hellcow May 11, 2010 9:58:49	One of the main principles of Dragonmarks from the very begining was that the core power of the Dragonmark was NOT the primary tool of the house. Rather, it was the fact that the mark allowed exclusive access to certain magic items. Being able to use Whispering Wind once per day isn't the business of House Sivis - it's being able to use the Speaking Stones that keeps the house going. Likewise, Repair Light Damage 1/day is trivial next to the ability to use a creation forge. The 3.5 ECS including a number of Dragonmark Focus items. Dragon 380 included a few for 4E, but a number of them have no mark requirement - something I suspect was lost in editing so that the items could be used in any setting. In 4E, ritual access somewhat fills this role, especially if you take my approach of limiting a few key rituals to the dragonmarked only; if you must have the Mark of Healing to remove affliction or cure dsease, it's clear why Jorasco has power. But adding Dragonshard Focus items that can only be used by marked people is entirely appropriate.
#3 Elton74 May 11, 2010 12:03:28	I think the Dragonmarks came among the standards because of the Draconic Prophesy.  Then the houses built items around the Dragonmarks.  You need a specific dragonmark to operate a piece of House made magic. One of the reasons why the outside world, such as the Arcane Congress, can't seem to replicate what the Houses do is because the Dragonmark acts like a key for such powerful magic.  If you have a particular dragonmark, you can use such an item.  Therefore, the Houses dominate key aspects of Khorvaire's society.  The houses themselves could form a powerful political oligarchy if they tried hard enough (they probably have in the past, the War of the Mark is a great example) and dominate old Galifar. One thing that was brought up in my thread about using the Sharn Deneith enclave in a campaign where they would be eventually defeated (by Keith) is that the Inspired might want to forment mistrust of the Houses.  Therefore, the Inspired see the Dragonmarked Houses as a threat to setting up their (dis)utopia.
#4 DoctorBadWolf May 11, 2010 20:20:37	One of the main principles of Dragonmarks from the very begining was that the core power of the Dragonmark was NOT the primary tool of the house. Rather, it was the fact that the mark allowed exclusive access to certain magic items. Being able to use Whispering Wind once per day isn't the business of House Sivis - it's being able to use the Speaking Stones that keeps the house going. Likewise, Repair Light Damage 1/day is trivial next to the ability to use a creation forge. The 3.5 ECS including a number of Dragonmark Focus items. Dragon 380 included a few for 4E, but a number of them have no mark requirement - something I suspect was lost in editing so that the items could be used in any setting. In 4E, ritual access somewhat fills this role, especially if you take my approach of limiting a few key rituals to the dragonmarked only; if you must have the Mark of Healing to remove affliction or cure dsease, it's clear why Jorasco has power. But adding Dragonshard Focus items that can only be used by marked people is entirely appropriate. I was thinking about doing something similar, except pushing back access to certain rituals without the dragonmark feats, rather than restricting them completely, or giving access to those rituals sooner with the appropriate dragonmark. So, remove affliction, cure desease and raise dead would be available at the normal level for those with the Mark of Healing, and a number of levels later to anyone else. This would have the added benefit, imo, of allowing all the specifically listed rituals for each dragonmark(with some additions/subtractions) to be affected, rather than just the really key ones. I figure the rituals sort of make up for the lack of least, lesser and greater dragonmark feats, by giving the dragonmarked character a progression of mark related abillities over the course of their carreer. For determining how much later per ritual, I was thinking something along the lines of one level difference per tier. ie, a level 6 ritual would have a one level difference, a level 12 ritual would have a 2 level difference and a level 24 ritual would have a 3 level difference. Alternatively, one could allow a reduced component cost for the listed rituals in paragon, and further reduced or no ritual cost for specifically listed rituals in epic. Just some thoughts. Options like that would be particularly nice for characters who wouldn't really get any useful benefit from the PP associated with their dragonmark, like non ranger characters with mark of finding or handling, for instance. It would have been nice if those PPs had been designed so that a character who mc'ed into ranger could genefit from them. Especially the Tharashk Wayfinder, since it already didn't rely on a specific ranger build option. The Vidalis PP could have given a character who doesn't have the beastmaster class feature a beast companion, and certain benefits with it, while improving the beastmaster class feature of a character that already has one.   /rant
#5 Hellcow May 11, 2010 20:31:13	I was thinking about doing something similar, except pushing back access to certain rituals without the dragonmark feats, rather than restricting them completely... Nothing wrong with that. And please note that I don't restrict access to ALL rituals associated with a dragonmark to the dragonmarked, I just like to pick a few of them to restrict. Cannith isn't the only group that can Enchant Magic Items. Beyond that, my point is that the rituals have been developed in emulation of the dragonmarks - "We've analyzed this arcane lock thing Kundarak heirs can do with their mark, and we've figured out how to duplicate it through arcane means." Player characters are supposed to be remarkable people. As such, even if in the wider world no one can perform remove affliction without the Mark of Healing, you as DM could declare that the cleric of the Silver Flame in your particular party can do it even though she doesn't have the mark, because she is a special vessel of the Flame and clearly destined for great things... or allow the Wizard in your party to create a ritual previously limited to a dragonmark, because he's just that brilliant. Restricting the wider world allows your PCs to stand out that much more - and gets into the question of whether they will choose to challenge the houses or use their special talents on a small scale that the houses won't care about. Alternatively, one could allow a reduced component cost for the listed rituals in paragon, and further reduced or no ritual cost for specifically listed rituals in epic. Reducing time or cost is certainly a way to justify the economic superiority of the houses. Personally, I like limiting the rituals themselves because I feel it adds flavor to the world. A church simply isn't the place to go to get your cold healed instantly. They will pray for you, and they likely have people trained in the Heal skill who will treat you for free as a charitable act - but if you absolutely positively need that disease gone now, you go to a Jorasco healing house. With that said, I'm all for breaking these rules for certain people. PCs aside, I might have a hermit dedicated to Boldrei who does have remarkable powers of healing - including the rituals. But he performs them without a ritual book, and can't teach them; they are gifts of his devotion.
#6 Elton74 May 11, 2010 23:06:38	In my campaign, I use the Advanced d20 Magic rules.  So, there isn't anything to stop a character from trying to enchant something.  Just that a Dragonmark might make it easier on the check to make the item (say a certain bonus based on your mark).  I can absolutely see treating them as keys, no problem. I really do think in a 4e system, restricting certain rituals makes sense.  Using Ad20M, like I do; it doesn't make sense since one can use a ritual to increase his chances of casting a certain spell.
#7 DoctorBadWolf May 12, 2010 1:52:41	I was thinking about doing something similar, except pushing back access to certain rituals without the dragonmark feats, rather than restricting them completely... Nothing wrong with that. And please note that I don't restrict access to ALL rituals associated with a dragonmark to the dragonmarked, I just like to pick a few of them to restrict. Cannith isn't the only group that can Enchant Magic Items. Beyond that, my point is that the rituals have been developed in emulation of the dragonmarks - "We've analyzed this arcane lock thing Kundarak heirs can do with their mark, and we've figured out how to duplicate it through arcane means." Player characters are supposed to be remarkable people. As such, even if in the wider world no one can perform remove affliction without the Mark of Healing, you as DM could declare that the cleric of the Silver Flame in your particular party can do it even though she doesn't have the mark, because she is a special vessel of the Flame and clearly destined for great things... or allow the Wizard in your party to create a ritual previously limited to a dragonmark, because he's just that brilliant. Restricting the wider world allows your PCs to stand out that much more - and gets into the question of whether they will choose to challenge the houses or use their special talents on a small scale that the houses won't care about. Alternatively, one could allow a reduced component cost for the listed rituals in paragon, and further reduced or no ritual cost for specifically listed rituals in epic. Reducing time or cost is certainly a way to justify the economic superiority of the houses. Personally, I like limiting the rituals themselves because I feel it adds flavor to the world. A church simply isn't the place to go to get your cold healed instantly. They will pray for you, and they likely have people trained in the Heal skill who will treat you for free as a charitable act - but if you absolutely positively need that disease gone now, you go to a Jorasco healing house. With that said, I'm all for breaking these rules for certain people. PCs aside, I might have a hermit dedicated to Boldrei who does have remarkable powers of healing - including the rituals. But he performs them without a ritual book, and can't teach them; they are gifts of his devotion. You know, I rather like your thoughts on this, the more you expand on them. I may throw something together combining the two schools of thought. I really like bringing to the socio-economic feel of eberron in ways that the players can't help but actively notice, particularly when it comes to the Houses, but I also like the idea of making the monopolies held by the houses on certain things really prevelent. I think what I'll do is, make one or two things restricted to use by someone with the right Dragonmark(barring good story exceptions), and make whatever other rituals are specifically listed in the feats cheaper once per day for Marked chars, as well as available slightly earlier. Sure, it will make the dragonmarked feats more powerful, but I figure it's worth it in order to make the world feel, in an unavoidable way, like Eberron. If that makes sense. Thanks, as always, for your thoughts and advice.
#8 Axiomatic_Badger May 12, 2010 11:42:42	Hmm, seems the idea isn't that popular :P My thinking was this: Firstly, the Dragonmark feats, although useful, aren't very dramatic. If we apply item powers to the mark then characters gain access to a suite of abilities that let them show off thier mark without the prerequisit of having a character class with associated powers. Secondly, the Dragonmarks as they are allow no real personalisation, unlike the 3.5 version which let you choose from a small selection of abilities, and altering ritual access doesn't do anything to change that. Thirdly, there are a decent amount of items available with powers that enhance the use of rituals. Should dragonmarked members gain the abilities of these items, then ritual access no longer needs to be restricted to give the world flavour. House members would simply be better at rituals than everyone else. Finally, the idea that the Rituals are new bugs me a bit. No, I don't know why. :D
#9 Hellcow May 12, 2010 12:38:04	Firstly, the Dragonmark feats, although useful, aren't very dramatic. If we apply item powers to the mark then characters gain access to a suite of abilities that let them show off thier mark without the prerequisit of having a character class with associated powers. One of the problems in 3.5 was that the Marks were supposed to suggest that the houses were the best at a particular field - but in practice, often ended up being useless for people in that field. If you're already an artificer, the Mark of Making is kind of a waste because your class abilities already cover it. If you're already a cleric, the Mark of Healing is really kind of redundant. So the marks end up being more useful to people who want to dabble - the fighter who wants a tiny bit of healer. The Mark doesn't make the existing healer BETTER - it gives the person who's not a healer at all a touch of that power. 4E sought to address this by making the powers enhance certain types of abilities. Now, the Mark of Healing is useful to the healer. The Mark of Making is still useful to the artificer. As for class flavor, one point that I've said a few times before, so I'll sblock to save space: Show A dragonmark is more than a feat. When I have a dragonmarked character, I use the dragonmark to explain many aspect of that character's abilities. So: You are a Lyrandar Storm Sorcerer. You take the Mark of Storm, and it essentially tacks Gust of Wind onto your existing powers. One way to look at this is "I was a sorcerer before, the Mark just makes me a slightly better sorcerer." I go a step farther. In my opinion, you are a sorcerer BECAUSE of the mark. When you blast your foes with thunder or lightning, when you fly, you are using the powers of your mark. And as such, every time you get a new thunder/lightning/flight power, your mark IS growing in power. It's a purely cosmetic flavor point. My point is that any time you use a power that is affected by a mark, you could look at it as "My mark just turned on and gave me a bonus" - or you can look at it as drawing on your mark to use the power at all.
#10 DoctorBadWolf May 12, 2010 17:26:10	Hrm...I like that bit with the guy knowing one ritual(some jobs I imagine might involve more than one), and that's his job. Definately going to use that.
#11 Hellcow May 12, 2010 17:58:12	Hrm...I like that bit with the guy knowing one ritual(some jobs I imagine might involve more than one), and that's his job. Certainly. The point to me is that it's a limited set of rituals that make sense as supporting a particular career - not that it has to be just-one-ritual. Looking to the 3.5 Magewright, "A magewright prepares spells as a wizard does, but does not need a spellbook to do so. Rather, a magewright’s training emphasizes a small number of spells to such a great extent that he learns to prepare them without referring to a spellbook. A magewright begins play familiar with a number of spells (of any level he can cast) equal to his Intelligence modifier..." with a spell list aimed largely at non-combat stuff. So the locksmith might know Arcane Lock, Knock, and Alarm, and so on. And again, I'd by no means limit ALL "dragonmark" rituals to the dragonmarked. In some cases, the houses themselves may have developed the ritual versions of these mark powers and train magewrights to work in licensed businesses, as described in Dragonmarked. Kundarak wants to handle big jobs, but they don't want to waste all their heits on common locksmith jobs... so it may be that Arcane Lock is a common ritual that any magewright can learn from a Kundarak trade school, while Guards & Wards and Demicache are currently Dragonmark-only rituals. I like to give the houses a few unique tools that make them stand out and make them the best at what they do - but I don't want to limit the options for the magewright TOO much.
#12 Ogiwan May 13, 2010 9:59:38	Keith, could the "development of magic throughout Khorvairian history" ever possibly be a Dungeon article or some such? That's something I would like to see fully fleshed out.
#13 Madfox11 May 17, 2010 7:45:59	Personally I never have been a big fan of using feats as a mechanic for abilities such as dragonmarks. The abilities are difficult to balance, because feats are expensive for some, and cheap for others. Also, most feats are simple and straightforward, influecing a single minor facet of a character. Dragon marks by definition cannot be so and considering the use of some on the OPs this is confirmed. By also making the powers narrow in scope in regards to the usefulness to classes, you only worsten the problems. You are basically asking players to make a choice between story/character concept and game mechanics, especially when dealing with concepts of characters developing marks later in life or where people already need to prioritize feat selection to make their concept work. In short, it favors the cliché character builds a bit too much for my taste. I think the current rules took it a step too far, especially for some of the marks (mark of detection and mark of shadows spring to mind). Of course, you could talk with your DM to design rules around it. Boons from DMG2 for example are an excellent mechanism for PCs who develop a mark later on in their career. It is the mechanism I use in my Birthright campaign, especially since I can combine it with "accidental" bloodtheft to hand out treasure for defeating specific monsters and reduce the amount of magic items I need to hand out in a magic item poor setting like Birthright. Boons don't work with starting characters though. I am also not much of a designer, and just don't feel comfortable designing completely new basic mechanics(modifying existing stuff is another matter ;)).
#14 Phobos May 17, 2010 13:49:41	Where might one find Hellcows "home" rules for Dragonmarks and 4E, I'd love to read them.
#15 Hellcow May 21, 2010 11:45:47	Keith, could the "development of magic throughout Khorvairian history" ever possibly be a Dungeon article or some such? That's something I would like to see fully fleshed out. Sorry, somehow I missed this. It's certainly something I've thought about. I actually have fairly solid mechanical principles for the evolution of magic in Khorvaire in 3.5, but it's something one could translate to 4E as well. And I've thought a fair bit about war magic in Eberron, which I wished we'd seen more of in The Forge of War - the actual tools of battle developed by the wide-magic society. I can certainly pitch it after I finish the DDI Eberron article I'm working on at the moment, but I think it's more likely something I'd do unofficially on my website.
#16 Ogiwan May 21, 2010 13:39:15	Keith, if you had a compilation of your thoughts, houserules, modifications, and so on for Eberron on your website, I'd use the hell out of them. If you had a regular bit on DDI, I'd also use that too. So yes, whichever works. Also, I agree that Forge of War was a good start, but I found it deficient in some ways. That is probably because I'm a military historian, though, so my warnerd level is far and above that of the normal person, even the nerdier sort.
#17 DoctorBadWolf Jun 01, 2010 4:15:34	Hrm...I like that bit with the guy knowing one ritual(some jobs I imagine might involve more than one), and that's his job. Certainly. The point to me is that it's a limited set of rituals that make sense as supporting a particular career - not that it has to be just-one-ritual. Looking to the 3.5 Magewright, "A magewright prepares spells as a wizard does, but does not need a spellbook to do so. Rather, a magewright’s training emphasizes a small number of spells to such a great extent that he learns to prepare them without referring to a spellbook. A magewright begins play familiar with a number of spells (of any level he can cast) equal to his Intelligence modifier..." with a spell list aimed largely at non-combat stuff. So the locksmith might know Arcane Lock, Knock, and Alarm, and so on. And again, I'd by no means limit ALL "dragonmark" rituals to the dragonmarked. In some cases, the houses themselves may have developed the ritual versions of these mark powers and train magewrights to work in licensed businesses, as described in Dragonmarked. Kundarak wants to handle big jobs, but they don't want to waste all their heits on common locksmith jobs... so it may be that Arcane Lock is a common ritual that any magewright can learn from a Kundarak trade school, while Guards & Wards and Demicache are currently Dragonmark-only rituals. I like to give the houses a few unique tools that make them stand out and make them the best at what they do - but I don't want to limit the options for the magewright TOO much. All good points. I'm discussing your thoughts with my co-DM right now. Hopefully we'll be able to use them to make the game more Eberrony. Yeah, it's a word, now.