I like Laser Clerics. Like Jeff Rients, I think there should be more lasers in D&D.
You disagree? That’s fine with me. Here’s the thing: rules are lies, especially the Fluff!
You want a darker, grittier Cleric? Why don’t we just apply Chatty’s patented template of Doom to this ability then?
The Evil Eye
With a slight smirk and a spark of glee in your gaze, you flicker your wrist slightly and rip part of your target’s essence. You transfer this essence into a nearby ally, the shared bond guiding his next strike.
At-will, Divine, Implement, Psychic
Standard Action Ranged:5
Target: One Creature
Attack: Wisdom vs. Will
Hit: 1d8 + Wisdom modifier psychic damage, and one ally gets a +2 power bonus to his or her next attack roll against the target.
Increase damage to 2d8+ Wisdom modifier at 21st level
So please leave my laser cleric alone.
154 words
Credits: Robin Stacey (Image), Graham Poole (Stuff)
I renamed the YA5KWEPALB series because the Usenet NetHack reference was too bulky to be used more than once.
I love doing this, it’s good practice to be concise in putting a concept forward.
Just so you know those 150 words took me longer to write correctly than my average stream of consciousness 1K posts.
Don’t worry there will be true epic posts soon, as soon as I recuperate from Gen Con.
No fair getting around the word limit by immediately commenting on your own post 😛
Dave T. Games last blog post..Critical Hits Podcast #7: Interview with James Wyatt
Dear Reader. Thanks for reading. Your comments are important to us and value your visit. We took note of your concerns and will have a representative contact you in the next 4-5 work years.
Thank you for your patronage.
=)
Since there was a metion on ‘Rules are lies, especially with the fluff,’, do you think that 4e powers/mechanics should focus more on crunch and leave the fluff up to the DM?
It’s a thought that has gone around my mind (and a few others I’m sure), that while it’s ok that the rulebooks provide the crunch of rules of how a spell/power works, but leave the description of its manifestation completely up to DM/Player creativity as long as it doesn’t change any mechanics.
Same crunch, different fluff makes the Rule of Cool go round! Just like your little template for the Cleric of Doom Laser.
What do you think?
By the way, it’s a nice thing that you mention about word limits. I think I should limit mine too. Heheheh…
Questing GMs last blog post..The 8th ENnies Award
Laser clerics are an abomination onto everything that is fantasy. They must be removed. I suggest using fire, though scissors are also acceptable.
(This comment is not completely serious.)
Tommis last blog post..Ropecon play report 3 – Frog-men, a giant snake and dark caves
@Questing GM: That’s not a bad idea. In fact, it’s actually in the rulebooks; Flavor Text, page 55, PHB. ^_^
I’ve been using a similar rule ever since first edition, and I believe it surfaced in Dragon magazine a time or two, but this is the first time I know of that it’s been in the core books. It’s kind of obscure, glossed over in passing, but it’s a bigger change than it might seem.
To wit, it’s no longer necessary to have a different spell for every “causes 1d6 damage” you want. (Not that it ever was, really, but now you’ve got explicit permission to make it so.)
They’re borrowing my favorite part of the HERO system: you “buy” the mechanical effect, and you get to define the “special effects” of the power — what it looks, sounds, and tastes like — the way you want.
Ninetails last blog post..I’m back.
I’m all for bending the fluff! Take the mechanics of the rules and turn ’em into something unique. The usual example is having one Wizards’ Magic Missile be bolts of bone while another’s is a horde of charging puppies. Something like that, anyhow.
Right now I’ve got the aches to create a Steampunk Cleric whose Lance of Faith really IS a laser gun that’s also her holy symbol. Oh yeh.
greywulfs last blog post..Character du Jour: Tymoth of Aranaea
Thanks for the heads up, Ninetails!
I never expect that it would be the in the core rulebooks for one, that it would become ‘official’ which is an implication that it is encouraged. Second, that it would be printed in the PHB of all places!
Ditto Greywulf!
However I used to remember that back in 3.x, we actually had to take a feat to change the appearance of spell/power effects. It had mechanical advantages though. IIRC, by taking the feat to alter the appearance of the spell, it increased the Spellcraft DC to identify the spell by 2.
Pathetic feat.
Questing GMs last blog post..The 8th ENnies Award
Well, for our first 4e game, one of the players is going to be a Druid.
As an “elemental fury” type of Druid, she’s playing a reflavoured Wizard. All of the crunch is staying the exact same, with a couple exceptions. She gets Nature by default, instead of Arcana, and some damage types might change.
But really, I should tell you guys about my Chicken Mage one day…
@Questing GMs: Rule of Cool, Rule of Fun. That’s all a Roleplaying game ever needs. The reason why freeform roleplaying games aren’t popular is that humans like to follow rules. It makes us feel safer. And that’s fine… I would have a hard time to enjoy a freeform campaign (I now know I’d love a one shot).
Knowing that rules are guidelines that can be altered freely provided that trust is established in a group (trust issues are probably the reason there are rules in the first place).
@Tommi: You know that a smiley, no matter how stupid they look, saves you from writing that little sidenote. People go read Tommi’s post on the subject it’s the first time I attack a post down before it’s written, I have new time traveling blogger powers! Woot! =)
@Greywulf: I want to see all design notes of that! Steampunk Laser Cleric… that’s a nerdgasm in a bottle.
@Graham: Chicken mage, Chicken mage! Tell us o slayer of untruths!
Dear Blogger,
I disagree with pretty much everything you’ve ever said, and also I hate you as a person.
Love,
Reader
Bartoneuss last blog post..Critical Hits Podcast #7: Interview with James Wyatt
Dear Reader,
Thank you for the multiple page hits your hate of our services has provided. Our president wants to extend his thanks while he drives away in the sunset with a brand new Porche.
Phil, smileys and usage thereof is a matter of principle, not convenience.
(Time travelling may or may not have anything to do with Google talk.)
Tommis last blog post..Laser clerics, or 4e bashing
Awww Tommi you suck the fun out of it all.
Mathematicians, such party poopers.
And I do Credit you for inspiring this post, thank you.
I’m kinda new here. What is the Chatty’s patented template of Doom? Because sounds awesome. 🙂
@Daniel: I’m a DM. All DM make things up just because it’s cool to do. I can’t tell you what my template is because it’s patented (I’m joking) but feel free to reverse engineer it by comparing my power to Lance of Faith.
Template of Doom for Cleric Powers: Make the Flavour text real gloomy. Change a few mechanics (Defense attacked, and Damage type) to fit the new text… check that power level hasn’t changed.
Bam!
Yes this what i love to see, been preaching about fluff since 4th came out ( i read that little tidbit in the PHB) but wouldn’t you know it, it takes someone else to say it for my friends to see it. Damn Rockstars have too much power.
I think this is interesting, but I have mixed feelings about it.
On the one hand, it’s of course very useful to be able to use a mechanic mold to fit in a particular narrative expression (in this case the ‘evil eye’ power -by the way, don’t cyclops now have some sort of evil eye thing?-) On the other hand it could backfire if it follows the “1D6 damage spell” (just to quote a reader) formula (that is, no mechanical just narrative change.) Specifically because narrative differences are expected to be translated in mechanical differences (which does not always mean hitpoints and bonuses and the like.) This might not be necessary and it can be placed in the background with some skillful handling, however in a game that basically puts the mechanics under your nose the narrative differences could quickly become stale… and then you’re playing a tactical game with flavor text.
Not that there is anything particularly wrong in that if you like that sort of thing.
the_blunderbusss last blog post..Cuddling with the 800 lbs. Gorilla
@ChattyDM, re: Dasis’s post
Phil, I think you just earned a bitchin’ guitar solo, way up on he tiny strings.
MeedleyMeedleyMeedleyMeedleyMEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
@the_Blunderbuss: After having played 4 sessions of 4e with Epic level players and DMs I can attest that 4e is a seriously psychotic brainchild. I found how why.
D&D’s is a game strongly inspired by the ‘discoveries’ and development of recent independent RPGs… Were I going for an easy shortcut, I’d say D&D 4e is actually a group of small Forge games linked together by the D&D themes. But that’s a crass oversimplification. (Thank you Tommi for the Insight)
It’s psychotic because the writers probably knew they were doing this but made all efforts to hide that it was because the D&D crowd is not ready for it yet (hence the outrage that just won’t stop) and 2) No one would have bought it.
I feel that the tentatives to package this game to reduce it’s Indie-ness is what gives it such a weird vibe to some while reading it.
But it plays beautifully ponce you get over it.
Trust me on this people…please. I’ll touch this more later.
I am eager to read more about what you’re talking about. When I attend PAX, I am going to be playing in a 3 hour session where we’ve been provided with paragon level characters. Since I’ve yet to play with anything above, say, level 3, I’m eager to see how the combat feels.
@DocBAdwrench: Any chance I could get an invite to PAX and meet the true Rockstars of Gamerdom?
=)
It’s interesting. I’m really digging 4E as a DM but I don’t really get the part about it being a bunch of indie games loosely tied together. But then, I’m not real familiar with forge stuff so that maybe be why I don’t see it.
I like how it’s easy to squish flavor around to make something fit your concepts (as a player or a character) better but some of my players have been having a bit of a problem. To wit, their complaint boils down to “attacking with my dagger doesn’t ‘feel’ like I’m attacking with my dagger.”
Now, this statement doesn’t make a whole lot of sense at first, since at no time in the history of D&D has “attacking with my dagger” actually involved attacking anything with a dagger. I’ve put some thought into it and I have a theory as to what they meant.
Essentially, the problem seems to be that no matter how much “skin” you put on a power they all sort of feel the same if you don’t put a lot of effort into describing what’s going on.
Rules are Crutch, Manual, and Physics. Fluff is trash. The rest is up to the DM. See my recent comment on this issue of Laser Clerics and D&D Vanilla Ice Cream over here.
So, i guess i agree with all you all. BTW – genius post Chatty, I may have to post my own Laser Cleric power too. =D
Jonathans last blog post..Your Game World is (NOT) teh SuXXorz
Rather: It takes several ideas of Forge games and radically changes the context they function in.
Carefully mechanically defined powers with loose fluff are nothing new. Combining it with carefully defined rules for breaking objects: uh oh. (SRD claims such exist somewhere.)
It might work. Maybe.
Tommis last blog post..Laser clerics, or 4e bashing
I tried to leave a trackback twice by two different methods and got bupkis, so I’m posting this response to point out that I did the same reflavor with the other at will cleric laser power at my blog.
Cleric laser powers activate! 🙂
Gregor LeBlaques last blog post..Reading Exceptions