User talk:Foxwarrior

Is there any particular reason this class has to have MAD casting stats, less weapon proficiencies than the Wizard, Wizard BAB and don't get Armored Casting? The card abilities aren't powerful enough for being almost completely helpless at lower levels; even the Dread Necromancer and the Beguiler get simple weapon proficiency. Why does it have that "can only summon higher cards if it has lower ones in the deck" ruling; that makes no sense.

This class is cool, but the mechanics need work.


 * My user page isn't a class. From your words, I gather that you are referring to one of my two Cardsharks.
 * If you are referring to the Abstruse Cardshark, then references to the Dread Necromancer and the Beguiler are irrelevant to me, as they are at a different balance point, but if you think the Abstruse Cardshark is too weak at lower levels, I could be persuaded to boost its early spells.
 * If you are referring to the Mystic Cardshark, I must point out that it has a far superior number of spells per day and possible spells prepared than any of the SRD casters, even at level 1. --Foxwarrior 00:22, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

You are amazing!!!
Every time I look through the homebrew (3.5) and find something that I like, it's created by you. Thank you, for you much valued contributions! On a side note, would you mind listing the bending feats, and recommended feats for Benders? I'm gonna start playing a Bender of Earth here real soon. warriors4ever 03:24, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * I will beat him to it, since I'm here and that's an easy one: Bending (3.5e Feat Type). Enjoy! - Tarkisflux 03:29, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * haha ok. thanks. warriors4ever 19:42, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * In addition to those (and I strongly recommend that you get at least one of the damage-boosting feats), you could consider feats to make you more tankish (to capitalize on your Heavy Armor Proficiency), or more sneaky (if you put skill points into Hide or Move Silently). Feats that improve throwing and ranged attacks can help you make some sort of Rock Throw sniper. --Foxwarrior 21:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I just want to echo the sentiments of this topic and let you know how much I have been enjoying playing both the Word Wizard and Shape Eater. I had not initially noticed that they shared a common creator, now that I have you can bet I'll be checking out some of the other classes with your name on them. Anyway, thank you for taking the time to create such interesting new classes.


 * You're welcome. It's interesting to hear that the Shape Eater has been tried out, and I'd be interested to hear more about that campaign. --Foxwarrior 20:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

- thank you for being so open to comments and so good at the bender of water class thank you this made my campaign amazing

Powerful Wizard
When I posted the half-thought out idea for the 4e wizard in 3.5e I wasn't really thinking it through much (I should start doing that) but nonetheless I was aiming for a rogue-level caster basically how you've done it but with some better spells and some other adjustments, like keeping that daily picking system wizards had in 4th ed where they pick two and choose from which of the two they prepare from. I post this here mainly to not bog down that Variant page with even more stuff, but what you have is kinda what I was thinking but I did just think of 4th ed in reference to spells because I never did like spells per day and I'm going to be in a 4th ed campaign soon and thought the power system would be cool if it worked at the rogue-level for 3.5e so as to not break the game as much, again not thought very much about just a random idea =/.--Stryker 23:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Ah. Well, I assumed that since you said that your party preferred to play Fighter-level, Fighter-level would be more appropriate. --Foxwarrior 00:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Fair enough, I probably didn't explain that well enough everyone in the group(except me and one other guy) can't play above fighter-level, (doesn't mean I prefer it though) and since me or him have to DM, the two most experienced players have to lower themselves to the others.--Stryker 00:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Let me introduce you to my familiar, Typolis
Thanks a lot, I make a lot of this midnight content on a computer with no spellcheck so I sometimes miss it big. Thanks. I'll make sure any Diaseses or Daisineses are the right thing. Thanks for the typo patrol. -- Eiji-kun 05:06, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Tome of Battle: Temple of Sublime Warfare
I had a sudden idea (which I will now copy pasta to all the owners of various homebrew disciplines). What if we made a sourcebook, we certainly have enough classes and disciplines to do so. Maybe we can get together on my user page and talk about a unifying theme like the whole Temple of Nine Swords thing. The title, I just made up... Temple of Sublime Warfare, or maybe Battlefield of the Sublime Blade, or whatever. Contact me and give me your thoughts. -- Eiji-kun 08:26, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Maneuvers you added to Infinite Lotus
Or, perhaps, more precisely, maneuvers you own that got added to Infinite Lotus, as I'm not yet sure who's responsible for adding them. It's not that I don't like them - I think they're actually quite good. It's simply that I would like to write them out in my own way, with my own rules take and my own name and flavour text to adapt them neatly into Infinite Lotus. Would you be OK with this? - MisterSinister 19:33, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I would. Try to make their flavour text fit neatly with their other disciplines too, though. --Foxwarrior 23:31, 9 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I think you misunderstand. You can keep the versions in your own schools - just that I would like to take your ideas, rename and reflavour them, and write them as maneuvers exclusive to Infinite Lotus, rather than the inclusion that ended up happening now. - MisterSinister 10:35, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I have removed Argument from Small Numbers from your discipline so you can make your own version, but Crockpot Disproof cannot be a purely Domestic Tarrasque maneuver. Unless you demand its deletion, you'll have to change Crockpot Disproof rather than make a replacement. --Foxwarrior 10:55, 10 April 2011 (UTC)


 * http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cfsU6GuMz08 - MisterSinister 03:17, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

A word of gratitude
I wish to immensely thank you for your coy criticism, and astute advice. My novice and hapless pages would be doomed without. If ever I can help you out with anything, just let me know. I owe you a great deal --Franken Kesey 05:19, 10 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes you do. --Foxwarrior 05:30, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Notice of Skill Removal
Just thought you might want to know that the Enigmas ToP skill died a well deserved death (I was never really happy with it), as you may want to update the skill lists of classes that point at it. The easy list is here. - Tarkisflux Talk 18:17, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Your incomplete article, Balefire Pocket Watch (3.5e Equipment), is about to expire
Foxwarrior, the article Balefire Pocket Watch (3.5e Equipment) is incomplete and will be deleted in 2 days as outlined in the wiki's Incomplete Homebrew Article policy. If you would like to keep the article, but cannot finish it in time, please sandbox it. If you need any assistance, ask one of the wiki administrators.

Ratings Update
Following the recent wiki vote on ratings granularity and display, all old ratings can be updated to make use of "love / like / neutral / dislike / hate" instead of the old values. If you would like to update your ratings, you can find a list of them at Category:Legacy Rating Foxwarrior. When you update a rating, be sure to delete the "|OldRating=True" part. - Tarkisflux Talk 17:52, 15 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Will you please update your Dream Sage (3.5e Prestige Class) rating? --Franken Kesey (talk) 19:59, 21 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you. --Franken Kesey (talk) 03:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Your current rating of the Dream Lord, has become out of date - and has thus been marked.


 * Changed some things with Judge of Existence can you rerate? Thank you --Franken Kesey (talk) 20:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks
Hey, just wanted to say thanks for going around and commenting on a lot of stuff that never had comments. Very very helpful. Surgo 19:53, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

Unhelpful Rating
I call shenanigans! Downrating an instance of a system you dislike is not a particularly helpful or relevant rating. I request that you remove your rating from Talk:Chimera (3.5e Bloodline), or rate it on its merits instead of those of its parent system (which I also agree is pretty stupid). - Tarkisflux Talk 18:17, 8 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Oh yeah, Kesey did have a point. --Foxwarrior (talk) 18:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Spells
A number of your spells are used in the dream lord class. Would you mind if I noted the dream lord spell level in your articles?--Franken Kesey (talk) 20:00, 6 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Go ahead. --Foxwarrior (talk) 20:07, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Reply to Tagalong Not-A-Class
Since I took so long replying, (my apologies), I have left this not to tell you I have finally done so.--Ideasmith (talk) 23:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


 * This note was not required, for I have the incredible power of Watchlist. --Foxwarrior (talk) 02:01, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Rating notice (Safir)
Halian (talk) 02:02, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I fixed up the article, so I marked your rating as outdated again. Halian (talk) 01:29, 28 June 2013 (UTC)

Rating notice (Safir)
Halian (talk) 08:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

One last rating notice (Safir)
This should be the last time I invalidate ratings on the safir, so I'd like it very much if you updated yours. :) Halian (talk) 03:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion for the Alchemist, variant class.
Epic ability: At 21st level the alchemist gains the ability to craft a Philosopher’s Stone (class variant, see below).

Philosopher’s Stone (class variant): The alchemist learns a special transmutation circle automatically at 21st level; this circle cannot be made permanent and can have no other concepts as part of it. He must gather and sacrifice 1000HD minimum worth of living subjects (undead will not work) to create a basic stone, the circle must be drawn large enough to accommodate the creatures within it at once (necessary), or there must be several circles linked (linking is learned at 24th level, linked circles must be on the same plane). The sacrifices may be bound or even unconscious, they need not be sentient, but cannot be plant based unless sentient. Creatures of less than 1 full HD do not count towards sacrifice total. The use of sentient life in the sacrifices to create a stone is considered an extremely evil act.

A stone is about 1 inch by 1.5 inch oval, blood colored, stone. The stone may be mounted in a setting for wear as a necklace, amulet etc., but cannot not be enchanted in any way. A Philosopher’s Stone is immune to non-epic spells, powers and attacks. It has 1 hit point per 50HD used in its creation (20hp for a basic stone), with a hardness of 20; the stone regenerates 1hp per day for each 1000HD of its creation. A damaged stone becomes totally dormant and useless until it has regenerated to full hit points. A stone reduced to zero hit points is utterly destroyed, turning to a red mist that quickly fades away.

The stone will allow the alchemist to create transmutation circles of greater “DC”. The increased “DC” allowed by the stone is 5 for a basic stone created with 1000HD, and an additional 1 “DC” for every additional 200HD in its creation. Additionally, the stone will supply 1HD worth of sacrifice per 500HD sacrificed in its creation; this ability does not consume the stone and functions each and every time sacrifice is needed for one of the alchemist’s circles. No special action is needed to make use of the stone, but it only functions for the alchemist that created it and it must be on his person.

A stolen, or found, stone may be used by others in only a single way, it provides 5XP per HD of creation for use in spell casting or item creation, such use slowly destroys it as its HD value is burned off bit by bit to fuel the effect or crafting. When used in this manner the stone seems to be slowly fading from blood red to absolute clear, shattering into dust when the last HD is consumed. An alchemist will NEVER willingly use, or allow to be used, his own stone in this manner except to save his own life. Holding an alchemist’s stone hostage is a nearly sure way to influence him, or gain a ransom.

Lastly, the stone counts as living creature HD for the creation of a new (replacement) stone, but only at half the HD used to create it. Example: a basic stone created with 1000HD would count as 500HD in the creation of a new stone. An alchemist may not create a stone with sacrifices of HD greater than 200 per level he has achieved (a 22 level alchemist could make a 4,400HD stone at maximum). An alchemist may only have one stone in existence at a time, any other stone will fade from existence at the creation of a new stone (so you might as well use the old one in making the new one). An alchemist may sense the direction and relative distance of his stone if it is lost or stolen, this includes knowing what plane it is on. Once within 1 mile of his stone he can sense its exact location.


 * State_Alchemist (3.5e Prestige Class) --Foxwarrior (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello Foxwarrior
I was viewing your adventure dragon article and I see that it is incomplete. I could help you finish it if you wanted but I'd need to talk to you directly in order to get it polished up. I went on the page and clarified some of the language like changing "Grappling Stuff" to "Grappling Checks" and I can do more but I need to know what your intent is with the race. If you are curious of the kind of writing I have done here is the back story to a Tiefling I created a few weeks ago. However as I understand it they are True Dragons and possibly domesticated cross breeds?

If you have any method of contacting you I'd need to know, otherwise you could contact me. My Skype is reshyshira if you are interested. Otherwise you can find me on Steam as well under my ID as Reshy (steamcommunity.com/id/Reshy/), I frequently both.

Thank you for your time. Reshy (talk)


 * I prefer the term "spartan" rather than "incomplete", but sure, go ahead. It wasn't really my intent to have them be domesticated; the objective was to make a playable dragon race, so I didn't try to differentiate them from normal dragons more than was necessary. Well, apart from the whole stripes thing. --Foxwarrior (talk) 05:22, 5 April 2014 (UTC)


 * A apologize, I'm still not terribly familiar with the formatting involved in Wiki Articles. But I have a keen interest in dragons and the 'Adventure Dragon' seems about as close to an actual dragon as I can find in terms of a class/race.  However, I wanted to discuss it with you and figure out what makes sense and balance it accordingly as well as create a good amount of 'Fluff' for it to make it feel more like a legitimate class and race and make it feel less like homebrew "and stuff".  For example, making it so that you can play dragons such as a Steel or Mercury Dragon in terms of abilities but without the HD and LA nonsense that comes with it.  Sort of like a template or variant.  However I'd much rather discuss it somewhere with you as it is your article.  If you have any contact details you would like to give me we could talk there.  Otherwise I suppose you could contact me... or we could just discuss it here.  Albeit it'd be much slower than I'd like, me not being the patient type.  --Thanks Reshy (talk)


 * I feel like the vast majority of any additional fluff would boil down to "see: dragons", which is (one of) the reasons I haven't written it, but I don't deny that sufficiently wonderful flavor text would make that worth reading.
 * But what colors are Steel and Mercury for chromatic dragons? That's the real problem with those, you see.
 * If you want to add new exotic abilities, you can make alternate class features for the racial paragon class, or add new Dragonly Virtues. Just make sure that whatever cool stuff you're giving is about equal to the stuff they're sacrificing to get it. (And, if you write in the Racial Paragon class page itself, I reserve the right to tweak it to my taste.)
 * I am sometimes available on the IRC Chat. --Foxwarrior (talk) 17:35, 6 April 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm afraid I don't quite understand the question. "What are the colors for Steel and Mercury as a Chromatic dragon?" I haven't the foggiest idea what you're talking about.  If you're asking where they're from the Mercury, Steel, and Mist Dragons are from Dragons of Faerun p.138.  As for the 'Exotic Abilities' what I was thinking of was separating them into two categories:  Pure and Mixed Dragons.  Pure dragons would be very similar to their native color in both powers and how they're viewed.  Mixed dragons and Pure Dragons are kind of like the Dragonborn's Wildheart versus the Dragonborn's Focused Heart.  Mixed dragons are more versatile and gain generalistic abilities, but Pure dragons are much better at doing what they do and gain the special abilities of their color.  In addition for Pures, all the species of dragons would need to be closer to numerical balance in terms of stats.  A Wyrmling Golden dragon is the most powerful kind of Wyrmling, yet at the same time it's usually about double the HD of other dragons of the same age category.  So instead of being more powerful they're actually weaker than all the others as by the time they're a 'Proper' Wyrmling the other dragons are usually one age category above them.  Furthermore, not all dragons are Colossal at their maximum growth, some only get up to Huge, which would be one of the advantages that Mixed is Colossal while the others aren't necessarily colossal.  I've been reading several threads about making dragon PC's which you can read here:  and  -- Reshy (talk)


 * To clarify "what are the colors for Steel and Mercury as a Chromatic dragon" is speaking specifically in the context of Adventure Dragons, which have chromatic and metallic versions for every ability set.
 * The rest of that doesn't really look like it has too much to do with the Adventure Dragon methodology at all, so I'm not really sure what you're getting at, but if you want your dragon to be bigger than the other player's dragon, you just have to invest more in Racial Paragon levels and less in class levels than they do. --Foxwarrior (talk) 07:04, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


 * So there are no true dragon types, only the ones specifically mentioned in the Adventure Dragon article? So there's no Golden or White Advnture dragons, only rusty iron and fools gold?  Also if I'm reading that correctly it means that if an adventure dragon becomes evil their scales lose their luster and vice versa?  Doesn't make much sense because if there aren't the standard colors why keep that as a hold over?  Other than enforcing the "pretty is good" mentality D&D has going on I can't see a good reason for it since they're distinct species not related to the chromatic/metallic dragon lineages.  -- Reshy (talk)


 * I think the idea was that Adventure Dragons weren't really supposed to literally replace normal dragons, so giving them the standard colors would be needlessly confusing. However, they were supposed to be essentially a more playable form of the normal dragons, and the trait of having a visible alignment had actually proved to be important in a previous campaign, so it didn't seem pointless. Needing to paint or disguise your scales to hide your true colors is fun.
 * Also, being shiny doesn't always make you prettier. --Foxwarrior (talk) 05:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Adventure Dragon (3.5e Race)
Hello there.

I was reading the race and I think I might have found a mistype. "Light Blue/Osmium 	Bludgeoning 4 damage/HD in a line 75'+10'/HD long"

I think it should have been 1d4? In another site (dungeons.wikia.com) it is 1d6 but I think that is just an older version.

Also Could you homebrew a feat that would allow the dragon to switch between sizes (perhaps with a minute time frame) or class feature would be extremely useful as many dungeons wont be large enough for our dragon at higher level.

On the same page another feat or class feature that would allow one humanoid form (specific with the same looks) would be useful to allow for low profile visits in the city. The stats shouldn't be important a 10 on str dex and con on the new form and possibly a feat tax would keep it from making Orange/Dark Gold variation obsolete

Lastly a class feature or feat for a portable treasure hoard kinda like a bug of holding but only for treasure would be cool. I have read in other homebrews which I don't seem to be able to locate now about also allowing X items from you portable treasure hoard to count as "equipped"

Thanks in advance for taking time to read this. I hope I didn't bother you too much with my rant.

Cheers!


 * I think it would probably be perfectly fine to use the Harmless Form feat, even though dragons aren't demonic. I haven't checked, but I imagine there are a couple of spells and magic items that would let you scale down as well. --Foxwarrior (talk) 06:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Hm perhaps the feats Deceivingly Innocent Form[Monstruous] and Hoard[Monstruous] from General Monster Feats could help me with the humanoid form and the treasure hoard for my dragon although the first is borderline too strong i think.


 * About the breath weapon of the Light Blue/Osmium variation is it 1d4?


 * Lastly thanks for the Class! it nice to have a viable way to play a dragon with variations in power for the DM to choose which one fits his game better. --79.129.29.120


 * Pretty sure the Light Blue/Osmium breath weapon is meant to be 4, not 1d4. 1d4 would be really weak. --Foxwarrior (talk) 07:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

New Guy's Request
Hey there, just got started with poking around some of the classes and the one that really grabbed my attention were the Bender classes that you made that are just phenomenal. Out of the box they look nice and can be reasonably set into a lower caliber game without over-shining over players. The option to make new bends was great and nice to see that the suggestion was even made. I have noticed that despite the balance in the class itself, there are several feats out there labeled as bending feats that are offering a raw +1 to +2 /level in damage. Would it be possible to see a blurb for toning that back a little or even just exchanging it for damage dice (somehow satisfying) for a lower power campaign where getting hit once by another bender isn't the end of the world?Gr7mm Bobb (talk) 16:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)