Difference between revisions of "User talk:Spazalicious Chaos/Pathetisad (3.5e Feat)"

From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Text replace - "== Rating ==" to "== Ratings ==")
(Added rating.)
Line 7: Line 7:
  
 
== Ratings ==
 
== Ratings ==
 +
{{Rating |rater=DanielDraco
 +
|rating=hate
 +
|reason=Joke articles are fine, but this isn't usable. Like, at all. Morale penalties are relatively rare, and small. Even though "allies" does, notably, include yourself, it's hard to use in any circumstance.
 +
}}
  
 
{{Rating|OldRating=True  
 
{{Rating|OldRating=True  

Revision as of 04:26, 3 August 2012

How Could You!

It's funny, but I wouldn't call it rogue. Fighter maybe, I see situational use in diplomacer/cohort builds. -- Eiji-kun 21:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I wasn't sure how to quanitfy it in the first place. I labelled it rogue due to A) nothing prohibiting allies being the inflictor of the morale penalty, and B)the bonus doubling against the originator. Also, as it stands this bonus applies even to mindless/immune to mind affecting creatures, though if fighter is more accurate I can ammend that.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 23:41, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm not bringing anything new to the debate or anything, I know, but I just had to say it: I really really love that description of yours, Spaz! It is comical to no end! Hell, it even gives me a few ideas... -HarrowedMind 05:51, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Meh, just your friendly local weekend warrior-poet, sir.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 22:37, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Ratings

RatedOppose.png DanielDraco opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
Joke articles are fine, but this isn't usable. Like, at all. Morale penalties are relatively rare, and small. Even though "allies" does, notably, include yourself, it's hard to use in any circumstance.


RatedNeutral.png Eiji-kun is neutral on this article and rated it 2 of 4.
Not the most serious of feats, but nothing wrong with it. Nothing amazing, but nothing bad either (which given its purpose as a social feat, I suppose makes sense). Really, it's pretty much "alright".


RatedOppose.png ThunderGod Cid opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
Fluff doth not a good feat make. Mechanically, this feat is just poor, even for a diplomancer who would intentionally give himself morale penalties for the bonuses. I would like to note that the shaken condition imposes a penalty to skill and ability checks, and any morale condition pretty much has that on top of the action denial caused my making you run away. So in the best case scenario, this feat preserves the status quo against anyone but the originator. And when you're affected by something like fear, your ability to do anything is also going to be compromised by the fact that you have to run away from the source. So good luck making it work for you. Totally not worth a feat, ever, in my opinion.


NOT intended for the dilpomancer himself, but rather for the diplomancers gimpy friend that fails most of his will saves. This is a feat that can turn any weak willed individual into a support character for a diplomancer.--Change=Chaos. Period. SC 23:13, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
MS addressed that below. - TG Cid 22:56, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
RatedOppose.png Aarnott opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
Fluff doth not a good feat make, as Cid said. This feat is more useless than Toughness. That's a really low benchmark to be worse than.


RatedOppose.png MisterSinister opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
In addition to what everyone has said above, this feat is also stupid and abusive, because it means that you wanna give it to some random dork (even a follower), and then slap the biggest morale penalty you can on them to buff your entire team. Dumb top-to-bottom.