Balancing Bloodline.

[kgauck]

Where is this "Vow of Poverty" feat comming from? "Book of Exalted Deeds"?



Its cetainly a quite different ball of wax from the one presented in the

"Book of Hallowed Might", which grants an insight bonus of +1/2 levels (max

+10) to Bluff, Diplomacy, Gather Information, Intimidate, and Sense Motive.



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by kgauck@Feb 24 2004, 10:50 PM
Where is this "Vow of Poverty" feat comming from? "Book of Exalted Deeds"?

Yep. The "Book of Exalted Deeds" is the good counterpart to the "Book of Vile Darkness". It's an original WOTC book...

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Birthright-L@Feb 24 2004, 07:10 PM
Choosing feats for a campaign setting is not a matter of simply players finding which books better helps you bypass your DM`s restrictions.

Well, naturally it is to bypass DM restrictions (well, IF there are). If a campaign group gets magical items normally, there is no reason to take it. The point was, to GIVE up equipment to get a better bloodline. And I told a way to undergo this. That's all!!

[irdeggman]

Originally posted by Ariadne+Feb 24 2004, 07:42 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ariadne @ Feb 24 2004, 07:42 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Birthright&#045;L@Feb 24 2004, 07:10 PM
Choosing feats for a campaign setting is not a matter of simply players finding which books better helps you bypass your DM`s restrictions.

Well, naturally it is to bypass DM restrictions (well, IF there are). If a campaign group gets magical items normally, there is no reason to take it. The point was, to GIVE up equipment to get a better bloodline. And I told a way to undergo this. That&#39;s all&#33;&#33; [/b][/quote]
You see I look at this differently. Taking this feat in a setting where magic items are rare is actually power gaming and bypassing restrictions. I mean what is the point (game blance wise)in taking a restriction that is not really a restriction. If a PC is not giving anything up and gaining a whole bunch of things, like are granted by this feat, then there is a serious bust in the way things are being handled, IMO.

[kgauck]

> I mean what is the point (game blance wise)in taking a restriction

> that is not really a restriction.



Maybe we should task Gary with figuring out the treasure value of every feat

so that we can modify ECL by such considerations. >)



Kenneth Gauck

kgauck@mchsi.com

[Mark_Aurel]

Originally posted by Ariadne+Feb 25 2004, 01:33 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Ariadne @ Feb 25 2004, 01:33 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-kgauck@Feb 24 2004, 10:50 PM
Where is this "Vow of Poverty" feat comming from? "Book of Exalted Deeds"?

Yep. The "Book of Exalted Deeds" is the good counterpart to the "Book of Vile Darkness". It&#39;s an original WOTC book... [/b][/quote]
My preferred alternate title for &#39;The Book of Exalted Deeds&#39; would be &#39;The Manual of Munchkin Might.&#39;

Vow of Poverty is only balanced in campaigns that uses the default D&D treasure model. Even in such campaigns, it&#39;s somewhat fishy. If you calculate the equivalent gear the feat grants, you arrive at a value of somewhere around 25%-40% greater than the treasure an average PC is &#39;supposed&#39; to have. Of course, there&#39;s the matter of top-end items and customizability, but the bonus feats given should cover that somewhat. In a Birthright campaign that uses a lower magic item level, Vow of Poverty is about as appropriate as a Sherman tank. Of course, a DM may still allow a significantly toned down variant of it.

Beyond Vow of Poverty, The Manual of Munchkin Might also contains other things that aren&#39;t quite balanced. In fact, they make a point that the Saint template specifically violates their own level adjustment rules. It grants more power than it should for the level adjustment it incurs - and the excuse for doing so? &#39;Role-playing.&#39; While I don&#39;t see anything wrong with an individual DM doing so in his campaign if he&#39;s confident he can balance it that way, there&#39;s definitely something wrong with WotC presenting deliberately unbalanced game options. When I buy a WotC book, I&#39;d very much like them to present stuff in line with the standard D&D design guidelines - stuff that is fairly well balanced. And playtested. I don&#39;t want to see &#39;we deliberately made this unbalanced because we think it&#39;s cool.&#39; A sidebar discussing &#39;how to balance game mechanic benefits with role-playing penalties&#39; would be okay.

In this particular case, the WotC label means very little. James Wyatt has produced some good stuff (most notably Oriental Adventures), but whenever it comes to the religious books, he seems to churn out a lot of boring garbage. I hope he&#39;s kept far away from the Complete Divine.

[the Falcon]

Originally posted by geeman+Feb 24 2004, 12:30 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (geeman &#064; Feb 24 2004, 12:30 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>In this suggestion bloodlines aren`t gained or paid for by spending gp.* Their presence is just accounted for to balance the character for the purpose of EL by giving the bloodline a gp value.* If a scion committed bloodtheft (or otherwise increased his bloodline) he wouldn`t then spend gp to actually use it.* His bloodline would just increase, and the gp value of his inventory would go up by whatever amount the his bloodline score increased and whatever the value of the blood abilities he gained might be.* There`s no "transaction" involved.
For example, if bloodline score is worth 100gp/point, a minor blood ability 500gp and a major blood ability 1,000gp a scion with a bloodline score of 15 and a minor blood ability would have a 2,000gp bloodline.* He doesn`t spend those gp.* It`s just factored into his inventory as a kind of "virtual" magic item, if you will.* If that scion committed bloodtheft on someone (or a couple people) and gained enough points to bump his bloodline score up to 20 and increase his minor blood ability to a major blood ability the value added to his inventory would increase to 3,000gp.
If the total value of his bloodline puts him into a higher bracket than he would normally have access to (according to Table 5-1 in the DMG) then that can be used to change his EL for the purpose of determining encounters and CR awards--but NOT his ECL.* There`s no level adjustment requiring XP to be earned, nor does he actually pay for his bloodline with gp.[/b]

Or, a different way you could factor this in is have the DM secretly deduct the gp value of the aquired blood powers etc. from the treasure he awards the character/party with in the future. That&#39;s basically how I do it -- and not just with bloodlines. Since I sort of ad lib the handing ou of treasure in my campaign in a kind of haphazard way, I just once in a while check how much treasure they actually have compared how much I would like them to have at this point in their XP progression and then just compensate for that in future adventures.

<!--QuoteBegin-geeman@Feb 24 2004, 12:30 PM
Not having seen that I can`t really comment on it, but I don`t think this method has actually been discussed much in the BR community, so the polling done for the earlier bloodline proposals doesn`t really make much difference since nobody`s really presented a system yet (other than the rather vague one described here.)[/quote]
Actually, I think this method was hardly discussed at all after I introduced it at the time. It&#39;s interesting to see it resurface after all this time.

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by irdeggman
You see I look at this differently. Taking this feat in a setting where magic items are rare is actually power gaming and bypassing restrictions. I mean what is the point (game blance wise)in taking a restriction that is not really a restriction. If a PC is not giving anything up and gaining a whole bunch of things, like are granted by this feat, then there is a serious bust in the way things are being handled, IMO.

First it was something to show holes in a system. Naturally every player (or nearly everyone) takes the best for his character, what he can get. And one thing is this feat...
And OK, if the player playes a neutral or evil character, he has to bite in the sour apple and can slip through no hole

Second, that feat is balanced with having and gaining absolute no possession of value. This means you can’t ever use magical items or even masterwork things, you actually GET from your DM (if it’s the “perfect” magical item for you, you have lost ). And: If you “borrow” a magical item from a other player for only a single round (even, if using a scroll or something), you loose all benefits of that vow permanetly. So the player HAS to watch himself (hard drawback if you ask me).

Further this feat is not for every class. Take the ordinary fighter: He can’t use armor of any type and no martial weapon. IMO, even if he uses a quarterstaff, no armor (end that’s why even with dex 18 a more or less low AC) is very deadly at the first about 6 levels. Only a monk (gaining his wis bonus to AC) and a bit later a druid (gaining wild shape at 5th level) have less problems to survive the “hard” first levels. So you can say, not all guys who actually take that feat are wise or survive long enough to get the “good” benefits of it, maybe only if they have the “Vow of Peace” as well (Don’t ask, the “Vow of Peace” is definitivly only useful for NPC’s).

And as I said, if a DM handles magical items “normally” (without restrictions), a guy with a “vow of poverty” gains nearly the same as a normal player of same level. He only needs not to “fight” to get some particular “found” magical item...

Oh, I nearly forgot: Using a quarterstaff or similar simple weapon makes it hard to pierce someone’s heart to gain the benefits of bloodtheft (just an idea)...

[Ariadne]

Originally posted by Mark Aurel+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Mark Aurel)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Beyond Vow of Poverty, The Manual of Munchkin Might also contains other things that aren&#39;t quite balanced. In fact, they make a point that the Saint template specifically violates their own level adjustment rules. It grants more power than it should for the level adjustment it incurs - and the excuse for doing so? &#39;Role-playing.&#39; [/b]

I must say that I didn’t read the saint that good to give a comment until now. I only know that a saint suffers +2 ECL and there are hard requirements to become one (something like never behaving other than good, 3 required exalted feats and one extraordinary sacrifice [whatever is meant by that]). Naturally you’re right, that IF you become a saint, the ECL is added, so you have spontaneously gained two levels. That is quite unbalancing compared with the rest of the group...

BTW the “Book of Vile Darkness” isn’t much different from the “Book of Exaltd Deeds”, if you look at presented stuff. The ONLY difference is: There aren’t enough players of evil characters around, who can use it (if there where, they wouldn’t survive long enough in a normal group, to check out the advantages of that book). And maybe I’m a bit conservative, but the only comment I can give to the “Book of Vile Darkness”: It is tasteless...

Oh, realy unbalancing are the “Gestalt Characters” presented in Unearthed Arcana (OK, other thread, but I wanted to mention it).

<!--QuoteBegin- Mark Aurel
I hope he&#39;s kept far away from the Complete Divine. [/quote]
What’s that? Can you tell something more?

[Azrai]

Originally posted by Mark_Aurel@Feb 25 2004, 11:08 AM
My preferred alternate title for &#39;The Book of Exalted Deeds&#39; would be &#39;The Manual of Munchkin Might.&#39;

Vow of Poverty is only balanced in campaigns that uses the default D&D treasure model. Even in such campaigns, it&#39;s somewhat fishy. If you calculate the equivalent gear the feat grants, you arrive at a value of somewhere around 25%-40% greater than the treasure an average PC is &#39;supposed&#39; to have. Of course, there&#39;s the matter of top-end items and customizability, but the bonus feats given should cover that somewhat. In a Birthright campaign that uses a lower magic item level, Vow of Poverty is about as appropriate as a Sherman tank. Of course, a DM may still allow a significantly toned down variant of it.

Beyond Vow of Poverty, The Manual of Munchkin Might also contains other things that aren&#39;t quite balanced. In fact, they make a point that the Saint template specifically violates their own level adjustment rules. It grants more power than it should for the level adjustment it incurs - and the excuse for doing so? &#39;Role-playing.&#39; While I don&#39;t see anything wrong with an individual DM doing so in his campaign if he&#39;s confident he can balance it that way, there&#39;s definitely something wrong with WotC presenting deliberately unbalanced game options. When I buy a WotC book, I&#39;d very much like them to present stuff in line with the standard D&D design guidelines - stuff that is fairly well balanced. And playtested. I don&#39;t want to see &#39;we deliberately made this unbalanced because we think it&#39;s cool.&#39; A sidebar discussing &#39;how to balance game mechanic benefits with role-playing penalties&#39; would be okay.

In this particular case, the WotC label means very little. James Wyatt has produced some good stuff (most notably Oriental Adventures), but whenever it comes to the religious books, he seems to churn out a lot of boring garbage. I hope he&#39;s kept far away from the Complete Divine.

Good joke. People playing in your campaign do not have any fun at all, do they?

IMO BoED is perfectly balanced.

You forgot the most important point considering game balance in BoED: GOOD characters have slightly disadvantages compared to neutral characters and evil ones. It is always a problem playing a REALLY good character in a not so good campaigns. BoED solves this problem perfectly, as does the BoVD for evil characters.