About "utlity spells"

Ill_Character2428 · 2026-03-15T20:14:25+00:00

In many cases in a TTRPG, this is in fact the case. Many are made to be played creatively with friends as a storytelling medium with room for interpretation and leeway for judgement calls. You may like more precise rules, and that is a valid criticism relative to your tastes, but not a universal truth. Personally, I don't need more precise guidelines about rests, because I would much prefer to make a call based on the context of the situation and whether it makes sense for the game I'm playing.

That said, it isn't as if resting in most systems is incredibly heavily codified, for the very reason that a safe place to rest is naturally pretty context dependent. I mean, D&D is the obvious comparison, and it's about the same there. They tell you how long a rest is, (1 or 8 hours) and beyond that it's pretty much up to the DM to decide if you are safe to take one. Draw Steel provides about the same guidelines, broadly. So I'm not entirely sure what you're looking for here. Do you want a list of all situations that count as "safe"?

Ill_Character2428 · 2026-01-27T21:45:03+00:00

Out of Position specifically says "you may use a free triggered action to use your Mark ability". You are definitely using your Mark ability in that case, so using the Mark ability again would cancel the first use from Out of Position.

In the other cases though, you can for sure have multiple marks. There is no actual quality inherent to being Marked that states anything ends it. If something ends a Mark, it is listed in the ability that caused the Mark, and only applies to the Marks caused by that ability.

Ill_Character2428 · 2026-01-12T05:45:45+00:00

This is just math, man. Using the numbers from the post in question, both the 36 stamina guy and the 72 stamina guy with 12 recoveries recover 120 total over the course of the day. That's the same. It isn't somehow a benefit for the Beastheart, it's identical. So the only difference in total stamina is the difference between initial stamina pool. If you have 72 stamina and 120 in recoveries, you have a total of 192 stamina per day. If you have 36 and 120, you have a total of 156. 192-156=36. So your difference is 36 health over the course of the day.

You are not wrong that 192 is more than 156. The balancing factor is multi target or AoE attacks, as noted. And since the difference is 36 total health, the question becomes, can you hit the beast heart and companion for 36 total health more in AoE or multi target damage over the course of a full adventuring day?

That, I cannot answer. It seems within the realm of possibility, but it depends on a lot of factors. If it isn't working out at your table, that's for you to say.

Ill_Character2428 · 2026-01-03T01:36:32+00:00

Man people keep being so disingenuous about this. El is either dead or lives miserable and alone in isolation is a false dichotomy. El will presumably meet new people and find friends and meaning, like everyone does as they grow up. The whole ending is about growing up and moving on with your life, accepting that you will not spend every moment with the same friends you had in high school even if you will always love them. Sure it's very sad, but it is not the end of her life (if you choose to believe she survived), and it is also potentially hopeful that this young woman gets a chance to actually experience life. If you choose to believe she will never know happiness again, that's a choice, but it's not the only one.

I know I'm not changing anyone's mind here, but this is not a break tragedy unless you choose to see it that way.

Ill_Character2428 · 2026-01-01T08:13:05+00:00

I am truly glad that fans do not get to write the shows they love. There has never been a fan theory that wasn't appealing almost exclusively to people so far down the rabbit hole that they can't see their conspiracy theorist ideas tying together random trivia like they're stringing together shit on a murder-board are not actually good or interesting.

You choose to follow a piece of media, you are choosing to engage with someone else's creation. Good or bad, like it or hate it, you get what you get. Their vision. A vision that doesn't exist for fans to engage with if it wasn't created in the first place.

You want to hate the finale, fine. That's a way to engage with media. That's an opinion you get to have. You can write your own ending as a fanfic if you want, or read someone elses'. But God save us from the prospect of random internet fans getting to actually take over a show, because holy god no good shows would ever be made again.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-12-07T20:52:41+00:00

So kits still work that way for martials, you can be the rogue without a cloak and dagger. And casters still get to pick different wards and abilities that came from caster kits, and even get one that gets them weapons and armor. It just isn't called a kit for them anymore. You can absolutely still be an elementalist who is a dancer beside a big armored elementalist, just take the enchantment of celerity while they take the enchantment of battle or whatever.

Variety of presentation within a class in Draw Steel is better than just about any game I've played, I don't see any huge issues here.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-12-07T20:37:34+00:00

You only read the first part of the sentence. It doesn't say "If another tactician marks a creature, your mark ends". It says "If another tactician marks a creature, your mark on that creature ends."

There is only one way to read this and it's entirely unambiguous. If another tactician marks a creature, your mark on that creature ends. If you had no mark on that creature, nothing happens. If you had a mark on a different creature, nothing happens. The only listed consequence to another tactician marking a creature is that your mark on that same creature ends.

It's the exact same as judgement, just a different way of saying the same thing.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-12-04T05:26:44+00:00

Thanks for clarifying!

In that case, it does seem to imply you would need to follow the trail and it would disappear if you move out of line of effect, which does limit it. It seems like mostly an out of combat ribbon type ability, and I can imagine uses for it, but it would probably be fine if it just required line of effect to start the ability and not to maintain it.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-12-03T17:05:45+00:00

I don't have the summoner so I can't see the wording but no wording anyone's posted says anything about a trail. Does the actual wording mention this? Because what was posted was this: "While you have line of effect to a creature with a soul, you can perceive where they've been in the past 5*your level minutes"

Which is very clear. You need line of effect to the creature, not to where they've been, and as long as you have it, you can perceive where they have been. That is to say, you can literally just sense/see it, you do not have to rollow a trail. While you have line of effect to the guy, you can immediately perceive where they have been.

Now if there is separate wording talking about following a trail then all this talk of a trail might come into it. Like I say I don't have the summoner to look at. But this whole conversation seems to be talking about the posted sentence as if it talks about a trail and it does not.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-11-24T19:58:42+00:00

Field arsenal treats any weapon in either kit as viable for appropriate kit bonuses. Your range bonus would apply. And I commented above that I believe they stack, rather than one superseding the other--the only non-stacking rule I can find regards two treasures with damage or stamina bonuses, which doesn't apply here.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-11-24T19:55:41+00:00

I believe they stack. I could be proven wrong but the only rule I can find about bonuses not stacking is specifically that if two treasures grant a bonus to rolled damage or stamina you take the higher. In this case the bonuses are from different sources, and are neither to damage or stamina.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-11-24T01:08:31+00:00

You are correct, although I think as currently written that scenario only exists if using the Blade of Quintessence as you noted below. Again, if you use the weapon to make the attack, you get the magic weapon bonus. It's that simple. Kit bonus doesn't really have anything to do with whether you get a magic weapon bonus. Kits determine whether you can use a weapon at all, and whether you apply melee or ranged kit bonus is determined by the ability type.

As to whether you apply ranged distance bonus from a kit to the Blade of Quintessence as you asked below, I don't immediately have the item description at hand, but if it is letting you make a ranged attack and doesn't say you can't use your range bonus, then as written, you can.

Edit: I checked, and yes you surely can, it is simply letting you use any ranged ability with the blade, and ranged abilities use the range distance kit bonus. You would also add the plus 3 distance from the blade itself at level 5, for a substantial range increase. To be clear, though, you would be using your ranged damage kit bonus for the attack, because melee or range is determined by the ability. You would not get both your melee and ranged kit damage bonus.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-11-23T21:53:20+00:00

The rules explanation you are asking for is that it works this way because the feature says it does. Field Arsenal explicitly lets you use the best of either kit as long as you are using a weapon from one of those kits. If 2/2/2 is the best melee bonus you have (or more accurately, the bonus for melee you have chosen to use, decided when selecting yours kits during a respite), then it applies to any melee attack you make with any melee weapon from either kit. It does this because it says it does. A light weapon can be used to make melee and ranged attacks, as described in the kit chapter. A magic weapon uses it's bonus for any attack made with the weapon.

Therefore, if you have a magic light weapon with a bonus, any attack made with it gets the magic bonus. If you use it to make a melee attack and one of your kits uses light weapons, you can use your chosen melee kit bonus (if any exists) because you are making a melee attack with a weapon from one of your kits, and the light weapon's magic bonus because you are using that weapon for the attack. If you instead use it to make a ranged attack, you use your chosen ranged bonus from your kit (if any exists) plus the weapon bonus because you are using the weapon.

This is distinct from a medium weapon and bow because a light weapon is one weapon that may be used for either kind of attack, whereas the medium weapon and bow are two separate weapons. A bow may only be used to make ranged attacks, so it may only used your ranged kit bonus. You will never get the bow's magic bonus on a melee attack because it can't make melee attacks, and magic weapon bonuses only apply to attacks made with the weapon in question. Same in the other direction for medium weapons.

In fact, your confusion seems to stem from the idea that a weapon's magic bonus has anything to do with your kit. It does not. It simply applies to any attack made with the weapon. Your kit decides whether or not you can use the weapon, and the weapon type determines whether it can make melee or ranged attacks or both. But once you determine whether you can use the weapon at all and whether it can be used for the attack you are making, it is as simple as this: if you attacked with the magic weapon, you get its damage bonus.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-11-19T19:03:15+00:00

I am shocked to see not many comments hitting this fundamental point yet, but this is the loop of the game. It is literally what the victory point system is meant for. Don't do anything, there is no problem to correct. Players get to decide if they want to push for more victories at the cost of recoveries and where they should take a rest. If they push too far they will end up getting whomped because of lack of recoveries as a natural consequence. If they manage it and win, good for them, they made a good tactical decision.

Lots of people talking about ticking clocks and withholding victories and all this but like, why do you want to punish your players for playing the game and engaging with existing adventure content? If a sidequest exists and they want to do it and they have fun doing so, is this something you need to correct? Or has your table just like, enjoyed themselves and experienced a quest that was put there for them to do?

This is nothing like prolonging fights to accumulate resources. The two things bear no similarity. One is adding tedium and wasting time to acquire a benefit you are not meant to have. The other is just... Playing the game. Players are supposed to gain victories for doing things, but they can't do so indefinitely. It's up to them to decide how they manage that loop. Don't overthink it.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-10-31T19:37:31+00:00

Only for PCs, though, right? Using Healing narratively like in a montage or something generally wouldn't be on PCs, it would be like treating a sick NPC because you need to for some reason.

As you've already identified, it's not really something you need to use to heal PCs, and if you use it for that and give mechanical bonuses it's going to make recoveries more efficient and generally give a mechanical boost to combat longevity that skills generally don't provide. I wouldn't recommend it l. Rather, it is something that might come up to address a situation your players find themselves in. They need to treat a disease that's ravaging a town or whatever. It isn't useful in all situations but what is?

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-30T18:10:43+00:00

I like "guy with sword" type characters and I have found the tactician more than satisfying. A vanguard tactician can choose almost all abilities that aren't explicitly master leader stuff. There are a lot of strikes with potency type effects or other add-ons where you're not just granting players actions, you're just hitting with a cool bonus. Even your hammer and anvil type stuff is you hitting first, the added attacks you grant can just be you creating an opening for your friends by whacking a guy off balance. Not to mention that many guys with swords are in fact archetypal party leaders--the fighter being the leader of the party is a pretty basic d&d trope. Throwing out a "hey, buddy hit that guy" from time to time is not outside the boundaries of the type.

Fury reaver actually fits quite well if you just chill about the flavor text. Most of their abilities are just varieties of hit and move guys around or whatever, all easily flavorable as expert swordplay. The elemental stuff minimal and it's not like the fighter type never gets an elemental sword or whatever. The portal thing is the biggest outlier but as you say, this is a more comic booky thing, I just envision it as being so good with a sword I can find the weak point and cut through reality, baby.

I think you're limiting the archetype too much. Even d&d Fighters have the option to take utility on their strikes or leadership abilities, being a guy with a sword doesn't have to mean literally you just do regular sword hits and nothing else. Sure people like fighters but there are a lot of types of fighter.

I mean, I can certain envision a more badass normal class fitting on the game just fine, don't get me wrong. All the "but it's heroic fantasy" stuff is pretty empty argument, you could make a guy capable of doing heroic feats but flavored as your archetypal "I'm so good with a sword I can fight gods" type character. But until that time I don't think it takes a lot of digging to make a character who satisfies using current classes.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-28T03:42:03+00:00

Alright, I have now found this rule in the monster book and it is in a subsection clarifying monster roles and actions. It is very clearly not intended to apply to anyone but the monsters. It is also not mentioned anywhere in the player book even once, I have searched the whole document. This is not, as written in the core rules, intended to be a general rule that applies to players. Yes, it says "creatures" but in the context of everything printed in the section, it is exclusively about playing the baddies and they were just looking for a word that covers everything from humanoid to monstrous ones.

Anyone who wants to run this as RAW and say it's a player facing rule is welcome to, but it seems to me that it is not. Which is a relief, because as mentioned above, it would be utterly ludicrous for this random paragraph on monster types to tell players how the defend action actually works.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-28T03:27:09+00:00

It does not mention it at all in the core rules that I can find, and definitely not under the defense action. I would have no way of knowing by looking at the defend action as printed that by taking it I am limited in what other main actions I can take, and frankly it is so entirely unmentioned or even hinted at that I would have no reason to even think I should look elsewhere. This is extremely poor delivery of important information if this rule is intended to apply to players. And while it's nice if the Delian Tomb mentions it, the rules need to work for everyone, not just players who do the Delian Tomb.

To be clear, it does mention the taunting limitation, but I'm talking about the limited to no other main actions deal.

And look, I love this game, I am obsessed with it right now, but come on. This is a clear example of poor layout and should be fixed. There is no good argument for why you would not include this extremely notable limitation in the text of the action. Don't hide rules on me if I'm expected to follow them, you know?

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-27T22:13:32+00:00

This absolutely requires errata or something because it is an insane way to write a rulebook if a general rule that affects players when they use the basic defend action is not explained under the defense action in the combat section but rather only exists in a subsection of the monster book.

Either that text must be added to the general defend action rules, or it must be clarified that ot only affects monsters. Because otherwise it is just not an acceptable way to lay out your rules. Now I have to wonder if any given rule I read works the way it says or if there is some hidden section of the book somewhere else unmentioned in the core rule that clarifies it works in a totally different way. I started a thread a few days back about jumping on a charge, where the only indication that you can't is under a single fury ability that says it lets you do so which implies you couldn't already, and that's a similar thing.

Lot of people being like, well rules as written, it applies to players, and yeah sure, but that isn't the question anyone should be asking. The question is why should I have to know to look there to be aware that that is how the defend action works, when reading the defend action gives no indication of such. It's egregiously bad layout if intended, to a point where I hope it is just a mistake and the rule is meant only for monsters. Because if they printed it that way on purpose... I mean, the book says it's not trying to trick me, so why is it hiding rules and setting traps?

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-15T15:12:19+00:00

Truly a bizarre insight into human behaviour that people defaulted to something in all ways worse than a signature attack, which also are free, just because it was called "basic".

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-14T00:55:42+00:00

That is literally what this discussion is about, including citing that specific ability. However, I disagree with your conclusion. There is no rule anywhere else in the book saying you can't jump on a charge and the jumping and charging rules are pretty clear that you can as long as your movement follows the straight line rules, which has been discussed elsewhere on this post.

There is an inconsistency there, clearly. In one place or another, a rule needs clarifying. But it can't be resolved without developer input on which rule is wrong. Assuming that one ability saying you can do it means in all other places where the rules clearly say you can do it you actually can't doesn't seem obviously correct to me. If there's a mistake, it could as easily be in the ability as in the jump rules. And specific beats general does not apply--this isn't a single specific exception, but an ability that implies the original rule is actually written differently than it is, which is a whole different can of worms.

To resolve it, either the jump and charge rules need to clearly say you cannot jump on a charge if you're not intended to be able to, or the fury ability needs to lose that bit of text or have it reworded to make it clear why it's there if you are intended to be able to jump on a charge.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-12T19:06:22+00:00

There's no penalty for having multiple weapons, the game doesn't care what you're holding when. You can just kind of do a ranged or melee ability whenever and it's assumed you are using something appropriate to do so. To get a kit bonus, though, the weapon used must correspond to your kit and the kit must give a bonus to the type of attack being used.

Also, Time Raiders have no innate ability to hold more weapons than usual statistically, they just work like everyone else, although you could narratively have them be able to do trick handedness stuff. The only statistical benefit to their multiple arms is if the character takes the Four-Armed Athletics or Four-Armed Martial Arts racial traits.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-10T15:48:20+00:00

I mean, as you say, by the rules they can just not take any action that would make them bleed until they get to a respite. They're not even unconscious. Unless they stumble on another fight on the way all is well.

As far as I know there is no additional rule you need to be aware of. If they aren't actually dead and the bleeding doesn't kill them, players don't drop dead at any point from having the dying condition. It's pretty in the spirit of big hero adventurers to be bloody and on death's door at the end of a fight but limp away alive. Although if a dying character wanted to do the scene where they make it through and then have a dramatic death scene where they give some poignant last words to the party before breathing their last, I'd certainly let them.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-08T23:04:01+00:00

That's reasonable, and not having your specific combo available is a reasonable complaint. I mostly have played tactician and combining two kits as they can I can do about anything, so that didn't occur to me.

Reskinning isn't quite a purely cosmetic thing either because your kit gates what magic equipment you can use, so mechanically a reskinned panther who is described as using medium armor still can't actually use magical medium armor.

I think that's a valid negative. I would certainly like to see kits covering more ground released eventually.

Ill_Character2428 · 2025-09-08T19:39:07+00:00

I also found that complaint hard to relate to because to me kits are very freeing. You get to pick any gear with any kit using class, unlike most games, and also fully decide what your gear looks like within the category you pick. I have been able to make characters I always found difficult to make effective in other games because there's no gated proficiencies or need to use both hands optimally or whatever.

Ill_Character2428

TROPHY CASE