?

Log in

No account? Create an account
D&D 3E
BoED 
28th-Jun-2006 11:50 am
Evil Drew
To anyone familiar with this volume...

I'm playing a Sorcerer with two feats from this book -- Consecrate Spell and Purify Spell. Both are listed as a +1 LA to the spells. As a lowdown on what they do, the former makes a spell half divine energy, and the latter makes it so that a spell does half damage to neutral characters and no damage to good characters, also, if the target(s) of the latter are evil outsiders, the die increace one categody (d6->d8, etc.).

After the first encounter with Purify spell, it was disallowed as being "too good." I'm not going to fight with the DM, but this feat was tactically awesome, and I wanted some opinions. Fireballs going off in melee and affecting only the baddies, etc. Would you allow this feat?
Comments 
(Deleted comment)
29th-Jun-2006 01:28 pm (UTC)
There is an equivalent feat in BoVD.
28th-Jun-2006 02:31 pm (UTC)
Would I allow it? probably not. Although, it is worth noting that there are feats out there that let you specify one or a few people in an area affect, and not affect them.


On the other hand, the way to deal with this is to have the PCs encounter opponents who happen to be good, but with different priorities or needs.
28th-Jun-2006 02:43 pm (UTC)
Or just encounter neutral opponents. Like animals, or less than intelligent monsters.

As to allowing it... it is an exalted feat right? So there's all kinds of other stuff that goes with that. In theory that should help balance out the spell, though it still seems like it should be at least a +2 level adjustment (+1 to do more damage to baddies, +1 to do less damage to goodies).
28th-Jun-2006 03:03 pm (UTC)
Obligatory 'RP Restrictions do not offset game power effects' response.

yeah, it is exalted. So the PC must remain virtuous, good, etc. etc. etc. That still doesn't help, as if the PC wasn't going to act that way, they wouldn't take the feat. To paraphrase the rule from HERO/Champions: A restriction that doesn't restrict isn't a restriction.

28th-Jun-2006 10:10 pm (UTC)
I totally agree that RP restrictions should not be used to balance mechanical systems. That's the problem with BoED in my opinion.
29th-Jun-2006 11:16 pm (UTC)
Ditto ditto ditto.

But I'd still have to see it played to be sure.
28th-Jun-2006 02:40 pm (UTC)
In a normal DnD game with mostly good PC's and mostly bad NPC's, I think its too powerfull. It eliminates most friendly fire situations completely.

In a game where alignment is a lot more flexible, then I'd allow it. I ran an Eberron game where teh PCs were all good characters working with undead soldiers, and the badguys were all LG paladin types trying to kill the undead. It would have worked fine in a game like that.
28th-Jun-2006 03:38 pm (UTC)
Just be fair, give the DM the Book of Vile Darkness. Then you will glad you have it.
29th-Jun-2006 11:17 pm (UTC)
I'm envisioning a situation like that, too.

Why is it so easy to set PC's against paladins?
28th-Jun-2006 04:02 pm (UTC)
I tend to find that most of the stuff in BoED is way broken. I probably wouldn't allow that feat in my games either.
28th-Jun-2006 08:29 pm (UTC)
the only really good thing about the BoED is when the DM inserts things from the BoVD without the players realizing. That is the balance that Blizzard worked out.
28th-Jun-2006 08:39 pm (UTC)
iawtc

Those two books are only balanced when the other is also present.
28th-Jun-2006 08:42 pm (UTC)
there are some items/spells/etc that are self balancing, but overall both books are the way to balance things out
28th-Jun-2006 04:54 pm (UTC)
Of course I would allow it.

Then again, the way I run my games, the "bad guys" aren't always bad, and the "good guys" aren't always good. If the PC's are comprised of mostly good and neutral PC's (which they currently are, IMC) then logically they would only really come to blows with those that are neutral or evil...provided they were given the choice.

If your DM is constantly throwing evil outsiders at you...then hey, he probably should have throught about the impact that your having such feats would have, now shouldn't he?

It's alot like races that have a swim speed. In some camapaigns, that merits a +1 LA, and in others +0. The DM should apply the same sort of tweaking to feats as well, either by adding a prerequisite, or even by a roleplaying aspect (if there are a horde of evil outsiders, they probably wouldn't like a guy who can throw holy fireballs).

Just my $.02
29th-Jun-2006 03:09 am (UTC)
I banned the Book of Exalted Deeds in its entirety.
29th-Jun-2006 11:09 pm (UTC)
I personally really like both those feats, but I haven't played either yet, so I'm not sure. If I felt my PC's were getting too powerful with it, I would simply build parallel villains from the BoVD. These things are pretty balanced, after all.
5th-Jul-2006 06:33 am (UTC)
Using those feats, IMHO, is no different, even easier to deal with, than having all the pcs drink potions of resist fire and having the mage throw fireballs and other firespells directly into melee... AND it takes up higher level spell slots that could be used for more pain-in-the-assery...
If there's a feat that the players can exploit, let them... All you have to do is start using similar tactics... Red dragons with Iron-Golem guards and the like... Evil druids using "Arc of Lightning" between the Shambling Mounds that flank a bunch of pcs... But then, I'm a vicious asshole... *chuckle*
This page was loaded Dec 14th 2017, 6:33 am GMT.