Talk:Ascendant (3.5e Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Rating[edit]

Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because with the lurk's skill points and saves, and only barely less than the psion's power points and powers known (by default), the ascendant can be devastating. In addition to having the ability to force opponents into a flanking position, the ascendant is surprisingly capable of performing feats of power that rival even the psion (given proper erudition selection). As far as balance, sharing HP and being required to wait until the following round after a disjoinment manifests a power evens the playing field with the Psion and even other spell casting/manifesting classes. --MrSissy 12:54, 1 September 2009 (MDT)

Wording - 4/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because there are a few grammatical and spelling errors (nothing major), and disjoinment actions are not clearly defined. Do the duplicates act as the ascendant does (per fission), or does each one get its own action (lest manifesting)? --MrSissy 12:54, 1 September 2009 (MDT)

Formatting - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4.5 out of 5 because formatting is clean and precise. The Epic table seems a bit off, but it may be my browser. --MrSissy 12:54, 1 September 2009 (MDT)

Flavor - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4.5 out of 5 because the idea is interesting. However, without further information about the actions of the disjoinments, I feel like the ascendant is a safer version of a psion with fission, but with more duplicates. Moreover, I get a very "awakened dreamer" (PrC in Hyperconscious: Explorations in Psionics[1], p.117) feel from the ascendant. --MrSissy 12:54, 1 September 2009 (MDT)

Rating[edit]

Power - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because this class utilizes well balanced psionic abilities in combination with powerful class abilities, however countered by their weekness in martial situations and poor saves. --Vrail 05:24, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because the wording is well written and has a nice flow to it making for a fun and engaging read with only a couple minor typo's. --Vrail 05:24, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Formatting - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because all sections were properly and adequately filled in. --Vrail 05:24, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it is a cool twist on psionic classes that I would have never thought of. --Vrail 05:24, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Rating[edit]

Power - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4 out of 5 because the class seems nicely in balance, being a caster with extra abilities but limited in spells that he or she possesses. The special ability is nice and properly balanced with good weakpoints. The amount of spells seems too much bt I am not that familiar with psyonics except that I know it is generally a bit better then the standard system. For that reason I deduct a .5 from the full score but I admit that I may be very wrong about that descision. --Crashpilot 12:26, 1 March 2011 (MST)

Wording - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because everything is clear enough to be understood, I saw no apparent mistakes in spelling or other --Crashpilot 12:26, 1 March 2011 (MST)

Formatting - 4.5/5 I give this class a 4.5 out of 5 because it seems to follow all standards for classes yet nothing fancy is used. It is clear and no-one should have a problem understanding the format. --Crashpilot 12:26, 1 March 2011 (MST)

Flavor - 5/5 I give this class a 5 out of 5 because it has a nicely worded story, it has originality within it. I felt pleasant when reading the class. Good job. --Crashpilot 12:26, 1 March 2011 (MST)

Quick balance note[edit]

Ok there are a few things that need balanced and the flavor needs to be expanded some but I think this could easily become a featured article. Here are my primary concerns: 1. Powers known - you have a more limited list than a psion but you also dabble in ever discipline out there. I think maximum powers should max out at 27. 2. Disjoinment - if it is suppose to be a copy of you then it needs to have your same skills and feats, otherwise this is just a cheesy way to min max your character multiple times especially since it doesn't cost you anything to replace them. 3. Universal oneness - giving a bonus to knowledge psionics (even if it is a little high) cool. Giving the ability to use every knowledge check untrained not so much. I realize they don't gain the bonus but all you have to do is max one skill and you are an expert on everything. 3. Erudition - most of these are either too powerful or should downright be removed. You already gain a lot of feats, you shouldn't be able to pick up an additional 6 stat points for free, you should only gain 1 additional power from perception (there are feats for more powers), premonition should allow you to retain your AC like a monk but shouldn't let you act in a surprise round, Spacial distortion should be +15 max (+10 more likely) and subconscious clarity should not be three - it should be at most +1 if it stacks or a flat +2 if it doesn't (sory I don't buy the idea of maxing out my int and raising my saving throws by 9 your average spell save would be nearly impossible to overcome with good saves.) Enigma is fine and overall it isn't bad just its too high on the power scale to really make FA status. Unless I get a specific objection I will work on it starting saturday to bring it inline for featured article consideration. Tivanir (Speak to me) (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2013 (MDT)

I agree with Tivanir. To fix Universal oneness, you could associate a number with it, such as "Universal Oneness +5" that increases as you gain levels in the class (like the Enigma ability is set up) that determains your effective score in untrained knowledge checks. As for Disjointment, you should keep the same skills and feats. You kind-of break the flavor by letting players build there disjointments separatly. It should also be clarified on that none of the disjointments is "you" (the PC), you are all of the disjoinments, and the charecter only actualy dies when the last disjointment is dead (kind of a "Schrödinger's Disjointment"). As it is, its a little confusing of a concept (I probably failed to convey what I met there). As for Erudition, just using a few of them already breaks the game (60ft move speed at level 6?). If the strait up bonus feats were removed, the Feat Erudition would be fine. Mental Development and Subconscious Clarity should not stack with themselves. Mental Development should be balanced by simply removing the stacking. You could also make it so that if you take it twice, you get +2 Int, +1 Wis, and +1 Cha, but ot doesn't stack beond that. As for Subconscious Clarity, you could increase the save bonus to +4 and make it no longer stack. There should also be a few minimum level requirenments for some of the Eruditions (e.g. "Spacial Distortion cannot be taken until level 12"). I like the class, and the flavor is great, but it needs more balanceing. The Disjointment ability is hard to determain exactly how powerful it is compared to something simple like "I do 5d6 more damage when I smack you". There could be an endless number of possible ways to use the ability (not to mention ways for the DM to entertain himself with the ability). --Salasay Δ 21:13, 19 April 2013 (MDT)
I need some outside opinions on this would the epic level 30 ability drive the character insane? Tivanir (Speak to me) (talk) 09:25, 24 April 2013 (MDT)
Eventualy. maybe add in a few inherent penalties with haveing the ability? like a moral penalty to things that lack of sleep could negitively impact, such as reaction time related things. --Salasay Δ 16:07, 24 April 2013 (MDT)

Image[edit]

This will need an image that doesn't infringe copyright, or we can try and get permission from the artist. Marasmusine (talk) 01:07, 2 May 2013 (MDT)

I was unaware of the copyright problem but we can always drop them a message. Tivanir (Speak to me) (talk) 10:42, 2 May 2013 (MDT)
Personal tools
d20M
miscellaneous
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors