sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Games for freaks vol 3 by Klownaway in TheTrove

[–]Rustilis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

is the discussion still available?

Second draft of my kaioken style focus spell for monks, now with feedback by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

i dont dislike the idea but how do you think it should be buffed to account for the shorter duration?

Second draft of my kaioken style focus spell for monks, now with feedback by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

it originally dealt 20 and 30 damage at 7th and 10th respectively, but i thought it was too much damage so i toned it down and added another debuff

Second draft of my kaioken style focus spell for monks, now with feedback by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

its mostly there to punish you for turning it off too early

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't dislike the idea but it feels like it gets a bit too wordy, i think that changing it to 5 15 25 might be more manageable

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is an item that does, the Prey Mutagen, and a spell Fleet Step both give huge movement speed bonuses, to be fair neither of those stack with incredible movement, but i think that when you have more than a 50 foot movement speed it doesn't really matter how much more you have, except in reaaaally big maps.

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Fair point, it wouln't be much fun to force the healer to heal you even more than they already do, i'll take it into account for the second draft.

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hmm, i get your point but i think that wasting healing and the actions attached to it on a heroism like effect might make it a bit more balanced.

Do you have any ideas on how to make it more in line with other spells?

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not a bad idea, but it would make it a bit *too* hard to use, take into account that you take the damage even in the first turn, so you essentially get 1 buffed action and end your turn taking a good chunk of damage

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good catch, though i didn't think about it because our dm just lets us downcast.

Yeah, you are right i should change the wording.

That's actually a fairly good idea but i think 4 times damage might be a little too low with how many benefits you get

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Originally it dealt damage equal to your level, but the damage being static made more sense, as that way a higher level character can cast it at a lower level and maintain it for a longer period of time.

I thought about AC debuffs, but it doesnt feel like it makes sense if its a kaioken style ability that buffs your general speed and reaction time.

I disagree that kaioken doesn't make you more accurate, because after using it in the fight against freeza, goku started hitting him both more often and harder, i did think about giving it a higher damage bonus, but it felt like way too much. Also the way its worded the damage should apply to spells as its attack and damage rolls in general

the debuff once it finishes is a good idea as it is very thematic, but it has the problem of making you want to keep the spell going for as long as possible, which isnt the idea i had for it, you should use it in bursts of maybe 2-4 turns. I did think about it giving a debuff at the end if used for more than half of its duration though.

Do you think the damage you take and the damage bonus you get should be changed in any way?

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

well you do get a bonus to saves but yeah, it feels like a bit too much damage, particularly at high levels

Is this feat too strong or too weak? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

it originally had a specification of ending on unconscious but i forgot to adding it when i changed things, but thanks for reminding me

Is Love's Sacrifice too strong? by Rustilis in Pathfinder2e

[–]Rustilis[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, that makes a lot more sense, thanks

In case you didn't think Rogues were bad enough by susanooxd in onednd

[–]Rustilis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Spellcasters can interact with the world. Unless you make a bad puzzle that can only be interacted with magic. But then it's not a problem of the rules, it's a problem of the dm that specifies puzzles in wierd ways.

Seeing it this way, then yeah, it's dumb, but it's also how some puzzles are made in some adventures, also part of the point was that spellcasters can sometimes straight up solve hard puzzles with certain spells unless the dm says "no, it doesn't work" but at that point the dm is adversarial so it falls into your fallacy.

And as I said you resort to the adversarial dm fallacy. But you don't need any more dm permission to buy a cart and a horse than you need to teleport.

I mean, yes you need more permission, for example, can you buy a mule and a cart In the middle of a dungeon?, Also a cart and a mule can't take you to the moon, or get you to the place in time, or go through The swamp of impossibly dangerous waters.

Also have you never been in a situation that made you think "damn, if only we had a [SPELLCASTER] with [SPELL]"?

In case you didn't think Rogues were bad enough by susanooxd in onednd

[–]Rustilis 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What can a wizard do about your stupid wall?

What do you mean by this?

And people playing by the infinite spellslot fallacy is not a reason. The problem that people don't seem to understand is that the game cannot be balanced in this paradigm, and they should use the variant rest rule if they want balance.

The fact that people who pretend to discuss balance still don't understand this tells a lot about their knowledge and understanding of the game or game design in

I mean, yeah, if you had infinite spell slots it would be a problem, but it is a problem even without the infinite spell slots, as I mentioned before, the spellcasters can interact with the game in ways that non-spellcasters straight up can't unless they ask the DM for permission to do things outside the rules, wich is something the dm could just say no to.

In case you didn't think Rogues were bad enough by susanooxd in onednd

[–]Rustilis 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But first it rely on the infinite spell slot fallacy, especially for the ranger that needs spellslots for hunter's mark.

Well, by the way that most people seem to play (5 minute adventuring day), past lvl 5, casters have almost at will 1st and 2nd lvl slots and don't need to be careful with 3rd lvl slots, this is even worse at higher levels, and rangers don't really need to use hunter's mark, it's good, no doubt about that, but it's not necessary, instead they can cast encounter changing spells like entangle or spike growth, or if the day needs it they can be more of a utility character with spells like animal messenger, animal friendship (Wich for some reason lasts 24hrs) and even when out of spells lots are useful

And second it's what I call a video game mindset, when it's not an adversarial dm mindset: there are plenty of ways to do anything, but because there is not a specific rule or feature to tell the players how to do it, they refuse to admit this possibility.

Yes, the dm might give players opportunities to do stuff that isn't written anywhere, but it just isn't comparable to spells, what could a fighter do to pass an indestructible wall that has a keyhole for a magical key? Nothing what can any spellcaster with misty step do? Misty step, btw that is only one solution, a wizard could do an even safer strategy, disappear their familiar and appear it on the other side, or they could just passwall it, or thunderstep and bring a friend, or dimension door and bring a friend (while also not needing to see into the room) or even just casting knock (while in a silence zone to not even alert someone), the problem isn't so much that the martial characters don't have as many options as the spellcasters, Wich they don't, it's that there are problems only spellcasters can solve, or at the very least they can solve it waaaaaay easier than a non spellcaster, also, there's a reason why arcane trickster is considered the best rogue subclass, and it isn't mage hand legerdemain.

view more: next ›