Talk:Seductress (3.5e Prestige Class)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Stuff[edit]

The class features need to be labeled as Ex, Su, or Sp, PrCs should not have ability score requirements, what is "save poison use," and what is up with those saves??? —Sledged 13:56, 27 September 2006 (MDT)

The saves are supposed to be "high", I fixed those, the rest I did nothing about. --Green Dragon 15:11, 27 September 2006 (MDT)
Also, I see that Survival is a class skill. That doesn't seem to fit this class's theme. —Sledged 19:28, 22 October 2006 (MDT)
I would say this class needs to re-make... --Green Dragon 20:09, 22 October 2006 (MDT)
Did somebody say remake? (Slides onto the stage with his top hat). Hmm, I think I'll give it a shot.
(EDIT: i'm done. Give it a go, tell me what you think. Who made this anyway?) -- Eiji 01:04, 6 January 2008 (MST)
IP 69.92.59.46 made this class and has since been edited by a slew of people. Anyway, my thoughts on this. Instead of changing the kiss name all the time I would either standardize the name or just spit into the four kinds of kisses, each with their own description. Secondly instead of stating the spell that is gained on the class table I would just name the spell casting ability on the table and then under Spellcasting Abilities I would state which spells are gained at which levels. This should also change where the number of times a day the spells can be cast would be. Also I am not sure how balanced the kissing class ability is. To tone it down I would add a certain amount of kisses a day that can use the certain kiss, just like the last kiss is done. Anyway, this looks a lot better and thanks a lot for working on it. --Green Dragon 16:10, 6 January 2008 (MST)

Balance - 1/10[edit]

This class has lots of potential, but just doesn't work. The class has all high saves (why?), but it's abilities mainly suck, with the notable exception of two, which are far too powerful. The abilities are ambiguous, the entry requirements are far too stringent... overall, this class simply needs to be entirely redesigned. --EldritchNumen 03:29, 12 December 2006 (MST)

Rating 2/10[edit]

It makes so little sense: the int 18 and cha 18 requirements are ridicolous, then it gives no explanation about why it should get monks' saves and offers still without a plausible reason some shapeshifting skill...

I guess this was the work of some younger player, yet...

On a side note: a male equivalent for it could have been a better choice, not to mention than making it a sort of elite class for the best succubi could have explained some (but not every) weird feature... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.221.198.36 (talkcontribs) 17:06, 25 January 2007 (MST). Please sign your posts!

non-lawful, non-good alignment restrictions?[edit]

I can understand the why one would have the seductress be bound by the alignment restrictions, however as stated in the description if she were a spy, and honor-bound to whom she were spying for couldn't she be lawful or good. I mean what she does may not be what she is.

Recent Changes[edit]

Recent changes altered the level drain ability to cause level lass, which is permanent, instead of bestowing negitive levels. This over balanced the ability in my opinion, and since the user was anonymus, it smacks of vandalism. If you want it changed back, please discuss --Ganre 08:31, 27 March 2009 (MDT)

It still can convert the negative levels to permanent level loss (which is fine) -- the problem with the old ability is that there isn't even a mechanic for "lose a level", and there is one for negative levels. Surgo 10:24, 27 March 2009 (MDT)
Personal tools
Home of user-generated,
homebrew, pages!
d20M
miscellaneous
admin area
Terms and Conditions for Non-Human Visitors