Difference between revisions of "Talk:Ranged Threat (3.5e Feat)"

From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Text replace - "|OldRating=NewVersion" to "|block=NewVersion")
(Added rating.)
 
(15 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
== Ratings ==
 
== Ratings ==
 +
{{Rating |rater=Zhenra-Khal
 +
|rating=favor
 +
|reason=Needful thing, this. Bravo.
 +
}}
 +
{{Rating |rater=DanielDraco
 +
|rating=favor
 +
|reason=Solid feat, well balanced. Possibly some small rules holes, but they shouldn't ever actually cause problems
 +
}}
 +
{{Rating |rater=Havvy
 +
|rating=favor
 +
|reason=Opens up the AoO to ranged fighting.
 +
}}
 +
{{Rating |rater=Eiji-kun
 +
|rating=favor
 +
|reason=Ranged threats are hard to get, this does it well.
 +
}}
 
{{Rating |rater=Tarkisflux
 
{{Rating |rater=Tarkisflux
 
|rating=favor
 
|rating=favor
Line 9: Line 25:
 
}}
 
}}
 
{{Rating |rater=Surgo
 
{{Rating |rater=Surgo
−
|block=NewVersion
 
 
|rating=neutral
 
|rating=neutral
 
|reason=This is not a bad base at all. The issue I have is that movement provokes AoOs, and that can get a bit nuts. Even Tome Point Blank Shot specifically disallows AoOs on movement.
 
|reason=This is not a bad base at all. The issue I have is that movement provokes AoOs, and that can get a bit nuts. Even Tome Point Blank Shot specifically disallows AoOs on movement.
 +
|block=NewVersion
 
}}
 
}}
 
I remember discovering, to my dismay, that each movement ''action'' only provokes one AoO. --[[User:Foxwarrior|Foxwarrior]] ([[User talk:Foxwarrior|talk]]) 07:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 
I remember discovering, to my dismay, that each movement ''action'' only provokes one AoO. --[[User:Foxwarrior|Foxwarrior]] ([[User talk:Foxwarrior|talk]]) 07:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
 +
 +
== Range ==
 +
 +
Why the fixed 25' here? It doesn't really match up to anything else, and the prerequisite ranged flank only works out to about half of this. So what's going on here? - [[User:Tarkisflux|Tarkisflux]] <sup>[[User talk:Tarkisflux|Talk]]</sup>  22:04, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 +
 +
: Mostly because it makes the edge of where you threatened (5' out in all directions) out to the maximum of your point blank shot area. That said, I've been iffy about it... think it should be longer? I'm not too sure about that, since combining this with Stand Still can make for a pretty terrifying combination. Alternatively, I could outright tie it into the range you can deal precision damage from (which is generally the same as Point Blank Shot range), in order to synergize with [[Precise_Marksman_(3.5e_Feat)|this feat]]. --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 22:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 +
 +
::That makes sense I suppose. No I don't think it needs to be stronger or farther than that, but tying it to precision damage range like its prereq seems a bit cleaner / aesthetic and would also be a nice way to let it potentially scale if someone worked it out. I'm not really concerned with the 5' of extra distance that comes from being able to drop it on the edge either, though I'm sure there are ways to word it so that it keys off of PBS range without also being able to exceed it if you're worried about it. - [[User:Tarkisflux|Tarkisflux]] <sup>[[User talk:Tarkisflux|Talk]]</sup>  06:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 +
 +
::: So do you think I should key it off of PBS/precision damage range? --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 07:11, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 +
 +
::::Yeah. Since you're basically already doing that I don't see a reason not to. Include a "you may not threaten squares beyond your PBS range, even if you select a square at the edge of your PBS range" or whatever if you're worried about the 5' difference. - [[User:Tarkisflux|Tarkisflux]] <sup>[[User talk:Tarkisflux|Talk]]</sup>  17:04, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 +
 +
::::: Howzat? --[[User:Ghostwheel|Ghostwheel]] ([[User talk:Ghostwheel|talk]]) 17:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
 +
 +
::::::Looks fine to me. - [[User:Tarkisflux|Tarkisflux]] <sup>[[User talk:Tarkisflux|Talk]]</sup>  17:35, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 22:43, 19 December 2016

Ratings[edit]

RatedFavor.png Zhenra-Khal favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
Needful thing, this. Bravo.
RatedFavor.png DanielDraco favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
Solid feat, well balanced. Possibly some small rules holes, but they shouldn't ever actually cause problems
RatedFavor.png Havvy favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
Opens up the AoO to ranged fighting.
RatedFavor.png Eiji-kun favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
Ranged threats are hard to get, this does it well.
RatedFavor.png Tarkisflux favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
The new format makes it stand out while providing a substantial ranged benefit. It was ok before, but now its both good and interesting.
RatedLike.png Foxwarrior likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
Now this actually resembles how it should work, even. The range limit being so short is a little bit strange.
Blocked
RatedNeutral.png
Rating 		Surgo is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.
This rating refers to a substantially different version of the article, or concerns mentioned in it have already been addressed.
This is not a bad base at all. The issue I have is that movement provokes AoOs, and that can get a bit nuts. Even Tome Point Blank Shot specifically disallows AoOs on movement.

I remember discovering, to my dismay, that each movement action only provokes one AoO. --Foxwarrior (talk) 07:49, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Range[edit]

Why the fixed 25' here? It doesn't really match up to anything else, and the prerequisite ranged flank only works out to about half of this. So what's going on here? - Tarkisflux Talk 22:04, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Mostly because it makes the edge of where you threatened (5' out in all directions) out to the maximum of your point blank shot area. That said, I've been iffy about it... think it should be longer? I'm not too sure about that, since combining this with Stand Still can make for a pretty terrifying combination. Alternatively, I could outright tie it into the range you can deal precision damage from (which is generally the same as Point Blank Shot range), in order to synergize with this feat. --Ghostwheel (talk) 22:14, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
That makes sense I suppose. No I don't think it needs to be stronger or farther than that, but tying it to precision damage range like its prereq seems a bit cleaner / aesthetic and would also be a nice way to let it potentially scale if someone worked it out. I'm not really concerned with the 5' of extra distance that comes from being able to drop it on the edge either, though I'm sure there are ways to word it so that it keys off of PBS range without also being able to exceed it if you're worried about it. - Tarkisflux Talk 06:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
So do you think I should key it off of PBS/precision damage range? --Ghostwheel (talk) 07:11, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Yeah. Since you're basically already doing that I don't see a reason not to. Include a "you may not threaten squares beyond your PBS range, even if you select a square at the edge of your PBS range" or whatever if you're worried about the 5' difference. - Tarkisflux Talk 17:04, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Howzat? --Ghostwheel (talk) 17:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Looks fine to me. - Tarkisflux Talk 17:35, 12 October 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://dnd-wiki.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ranged_Threat_(3.5e_Feat)&oldid=265960"
Facts about "Ranged Threat (3.5e Feat)"
RDF feed
FavoredZhenra-Khal +, DanielDraco +, Havvy +, Eiji-kun + and Tarkisflux +
LikedFoxwarrior +
UncountedRatingSurgo +