Binders (Really)

[hewhosaysfish]

I originally posted my question in this (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=243726) thread but far too late to get it back on topic.

People can feel free to throw in other Binder-related remarks here too.



So I was playing a Binder character in a recent campaign (until he fell 3 stories into boiling tar...) and I found that I was often choosing the same vestiges from day to day. (This was from 1st level through to 6th so he only bound one vestige at a time.)

When we were going into somewhere where we would probably be fighting, I would bind Savnok or Amon to help me mix it up in melee; when we were planning to muck around in town I would bind Naberius for the Disguise Self and taking 10 on talky skills.

The other vestiges I bound at most [b]once[b], just to see what they were like. Poor Leraje and Dahlver-Nar never got to come out and play at all.
I did take the Expel Vestige feat so that I could switch to one of these vestiges if an obstacle came up that perfectly matched their random abilities but
A) these situations only came up once in a blue moon
B) when they did it would often be in a time-critical situation so I couldn't spare the 2 minutes to draw a seal and make a pact
C) when I had the time I had a 50-50 chance of failing the binding check to expel my current vestige (and so be stuck with it)

It felt like a terrible waste of the Binder's versatility and potential to just use the same vestiges over and over. They just seemed to be the most generically useful. I could have chosen other vestiges just for the sake of a more varied experience... but I couldn't shake the fear that "more varied experience" would end up meaning "getting hit more often", "doing less damage" or "failing more skill checks".

I've also been thinking about playing a Chameleon in future (if my current character happens to fall 5 stories into a lava pit...) and I can imagine a similar thing happening with that class: I find that one Focus particularly complements the party composition and the party composition stays the same from one day to the next so the person playing the Chameleon has to choose between picking the same option every day or picking something they've already decided is inferior.

Has anyone else had this problem when playing a Binder? Has anyone got any tips for avoiding this trap? (Apart from having a Binder, a Chameleon and a Factotum in the same party and rotating jobs every day. That would be awesome but require a lot of cooperation from the group.)


TL;DR
What do you do if you find yourself using the same vestiges over and over and over?

EDIT: I just looked at the replies I got in the previous thread.
The consensus seems to be that the problem is mostly due to only being able to bind one vestige at a time and that it improves at higher levels.

[Kaje]

I don't really see a problem. You still have the option of versatility if you need it (even in the middle of the day you can have expel vestige and rapid pact making) but if you've found something that works, stick with it. Hell, most of the binder builds I've devised pretty much just rely on Naberius, Zceryll, Tenebrous and Focalor.

[Longcat]

Depends on your playstyle, mostly. If I play a melee focused binder, I'll never leave home without Chupoclops, since Pounce is just that useful. Similarly, if there are any T1-2 in the group, I'll insist on taking Zceryll along.

In order to avoid it, you have to change roles frequently. Play a melee binder one day, and a support/debuff focused one the next day.

As for Chameleons, the Arcane/Divine Casting focus is immensely superior to all the other ones.

[Amphetryon]

I your party is facing a similar type of encounter day in and day out, you can definitely find yourself in "Vestige Repeater Mode." On the other hand, if you're in a campaign where you mix up fighting with court intrigue with espionage with exploration - I've seen good city-based campaigns that do this, for instance - you'll get more low-level mileage from being able to change Vestiges to suit the occasion.

[Morph Bark]

The lack in versatility and switching up binds is mostly due to lack of vestiges. If you want to excel in a certain role, you often end up picking vestiges of lower levels, especially if you can bind multiple vestiges. If you could bind four vestiges of level 8 that all had the same role, the Binder would still be pretty effective at level 20. Still, yes, you will likely end up using the same vestiges over and over again, especially since even a Binder will likely specialize a little with their choices in feats and the like. A lot of prepared spellcasters pick the same spells every day as well, but do to their amount of spells/day they just seem to play very differently because they have a larger amount of abilities (spells) to choose from in any given round (and many can have creative applications). Thus we should moreso compare him to more limited classes, like martial adepts (incarnum-users could do too, but they still have a pretty high degree of versatility). Most martial adepts use the same few maneuvers over and over again as well, but people still play them a lot. Even if you pick the same vestiges every day, this does not have to be bad, though I agree it would be more fun to switch it up in a manner like Amphetryon suggests.

I'm kind of surprised you didn't use Dahlver-Nar though. He's pretty good for melee Binders.

[hewhosaysfish]

Depends on your playstyle, mostly. If I play a melee focused binder, I'll never leave home without Chupoclops, since Pounce is just that useful. Similarly, if there are any T1-2 in the group, I'll insist on taking Zceryll along.

In order to avoid it, you have to change roles frequently. Play a melee binder one day, and a support/debuff focused one the next day.

Alas, I was never high enough level to use either of those two. I can see though, that being higher level would give you the freedom to bind one "best" vestige all the time while switching the secondary vestiges up from day to day.


As for Chameleons, the Arcane/Divine Casting focus is immensely superior to all the other ones.

Bleh. If you take Arcane Focus everyday don't you just end up as a slightly inferior Wizard?


I don't really see a problem. You still have the option of versatility if you need it (even in the middle of the day you can have expel vestige and rapid pact making) but if you've found something that works, stick with it. Hell, most of the binder builds I've devised pretty much just rely on Naberius, Zceryll, Tenebrous and Focalor.

I'm not so sure about Rapid Pact Making. If you can spare one minute to draw the seal and a full round action to make the pact, then surely you can spare one minute for the seal and another for the pact. Maybe if you have one of those magical cloths that works as a portable, permanent seal. (Although a Vestige Phylactery seems like it would be a more versatile option that costs gold instead of a feat.)

And Focalor? Really? What did I miss about him? Is it the Blinding Breath?


I'm kind of surprised you didn't use Dahlver-Nar though. He's pretty good for melee Binders.

Another vestige I have apparently underestimated...

[Yuki Akuma]

Bleh. If you take Arcane Focus everyday don't you just end up as a slightly inferior Wizard?

No, because you can cast Bard, Assassin, Trapsmith and Wu Jen spells too.

(And Beguiler, Dread Necromancer, etc. etc. ad nauseum...)

[Bloodgruve]

I've got a couple questions similar to heywho's OP. Can a binder keep up with other damage classes/builds? I'm looking to make a backup level 12 character and Binder looks interesting.

Can you effectively build a character that can Melee, ranged, SA and 'cast' at similar damage output depending on the vestige choices or do you need to specialize and bring in 'secondary' vestiges when needed?

How would you do a melee damage setup at level 12 and what vestiges, stats, skills and feats should you look at while maintaining versatility? Damage being the primary goal versatility being a close second.

Thanks
Blood~

[Bloodgruve]

Double post...

[Morph Bark]

With regards to the Chameleon, Martial Focus is useless and would be better if it granted full BAB, Stealth Focus is mostly useless since you probably get all you need from it with the class you entered the PrC with, Wild Focus doesn't really grant anything useful except in very very specific cases. Arcane and Divine Focus simply are the two foci that grant access to new abilities (spells) and do so amazingly well, since you get access to ALL arcane or divine spells of the level you can cast, not a specific list. Hence they add more to your base class' abilities while also providing new things which are good and versatile.

[Suddo]

I thought about buffing Expel Vestige just so you can push out a vestige quick enough. Though you do have to admit Binders are pretty cool and decently balanced.

[Kaje]

I'm not so sure about Rapid Pact Making. If you can spare one minute to draw the seal and a full round action to make the pact, then surely you can spare one minute for the seal and another for the pact. Maybe if you have one of those magical cloths that works as a portable, permanent seal. (Although a Vestige Phylactery seems like it would be a more versatile option that costs gold instead of a feat.)

And Focalor? Really? What did I miss about him? Is it the Blinding Breath?I've seen some people rule that with Rapid Pact Making you don't need to take the minute to draw the seal. That you simply take a full round action to complete the whole process.

As for Focalor, I just like debuffers.

[Sutremaine]

And Focalor? Really? What did I miss about him? Is it the Blinding Breath?
Aura of Sadness, possibly. Loses a little magic when immunity to mind-affecting effects becomes common, but otherwise anyone standing next to you gets a -2 on saves, attack rolls, and skill checks. Gels nicely with Chupuclops' Aura of Despair, which does the same thing but additionally affects weapon damage and all checks and does so in a 10ft radius (but is also a fear effect).

There's also his Lightning Strike ability, which is very minor but hey, free ranged damage unless your target resists electricity or has Evasion.

[Andorax]

I can't really speak to the Binders, but the Chameleon is a very useful class in a party who's composition ISN'T always consistent. If you're lacking party members because of either a high bodycount or gaming attendance issues, having someone who can be the cleric one week, then be the wizard next, can come in handy.

And in town, picking up "your choice of item creation feat here" and spending downtime crafting what's needed is always a plus.

One thing that might make the other foci more interesting is if you tied the "mimic class feature" abilities to them...for example:

Evasion works as written...unless you're in stealth focus at the time, then it counts as improved evasion.

Rage works as written...unless you're in combat focus, in which case you get +6/+6.

Sneak Attack works as written...unless you're in stealth focus, in which case you get +1d6 per 2 class levels instead of +1d6 per 3.

Maybe even allow a limited Wild Shape "mimic class feature" ability that's ONLY accessable if you're in Wild focus?

[Bonzai]

I think that this is a pretty natural phenomena within the class. Eventually, you are going to learn what niche fits best in your party, and only a certain number of vestiges will lend themselves toward that role. Once you figure out that, and your fighting style, the standouts become real evident. Yeah, Binders have versatility, but that versatility is in the variety of ways that they can be played. Once you establish what you want to do on a daily basis, then yes... it kind of becomes ingrained.

For me, Tenebrous and Orthos where my key Binds, but I favored ranged attacks.

[SSGoW]

Beur, Paimon, and Focalor are my main vestiges...

Right now I'm a level 6 binder with Martial Study/Martial Stance feats... Paimon + Shadow Blade Feat makes for a dang good melee build. Might even spend some cross class skill points into tumble.

I can't wait for level 8 when I can bind Paimon full time and rotate the other vestiges around. No one in the party is a real melee threat and I'm not to worried about being optimized so keeping with 2 or 3 main vestiges is fine with me.

[willpell]

Found out that a lot of my issues with the Binder could have been ameliorated long ago if I'd just been prompter in reading the Feats chapter. The Favored Vestige line is perfect for my preference for using a signature vestige rather than an ever-changing selection, and I was also very happy to discover the Ignore Special Requirements feat, since while some of the vestiges' requirements are very flavorful, others are just a bit silly, and it's good to have the option of turning them off at a cost.

One other thing I gotta say about the feats - they really didn't want you to be too successful with Bind Vestige. You only get one ability from it (two if you toss in a second feat), and not usually one of the better ones. Compares rather poorly with Shape Soulmeld, IMO. I've really had to rack my brain to come up with any cases where I could imagine wanting Bind Vestige at all, and even fewer where I'd be satisfied with just that and not throw in Improved Bind Vestige from level 1 just to have a decent set of choices. (One of the few examples I could come up with was a Warlock, who might take Aym to make him good at damaging objects since his Eldritch Blast is weak against them.)

I could have sworn there was a link on my old thread to a list of online vestiges. Any chance anyone could point me toward such a list? I did find Zcerll on the Wotco website (and gawd is she ever nutzorz), but I'd heard there were others and haven't a clue how to find them.

[Amphetryon]

Compares rather poorly with Shape Soulmeld, IMO.Shape Soulmeld doesn't give the benefits you gain from binding said soulmeld to a chakra, remember; it only gives the ability listed before the essentia: paragraph in the soulmeld's description. To gain the benefits of binding it, you'd need to invest a second Feat - Open [blank] Chakra - and the character level prerequisite increases with the presumptive power of the chakra slot. I'd say they're pretty closely balanced, given different authors with presumably different ideas about exactly where the "sweet spot" is between weak and overpowered.

[thompur]

Found out that a lot of my issues with the Binder could have been ameliorated long ago if I'd just been prompter in reading the Feats chapter. The Favored Vestige line is perfect for my preference for using a signature vestige rather than an ever-changing selection, and I was also very happy to discover the Ignore Special Requirements feat, since while some of the vestiges' requirements are very flavorful, others are just a bit silly, and it's good to have the option of turning them off at a cost.

One other thing I gotta say about the feats - they really didn't want you to be too successful with Bind Vestige. You only get one ability from it (two if you toss in a second feat), and not usually one of the better ones. Compares rather poorly with Shape Soulmeld, IMO. I've really had to rack my brain to come up with any cases where I could imagine wanting Bind Vestige at all, and even fewer where I'd be satisfied with just that and not throw in Improved Bind Vestige from level 1 just to have a decent set of choices. (One of the few examples I could come up with was a Warlock, who might take Aym to make him good at damaging objects since his Eldritch Blast is weak against them.)

I could have sworn there was a link on my old thread to a list of online vestiges. Any chance anyone could point me toward such a list? I did find Zcerll on the Wotco website (and gawd is she ever nutzorz), but I'd heard there were others and haven't a clue how to find them.

Here's a link (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11235.0)

[Kaje]

Plus with Bind Vestige you can choose to bind any of those early vestiges that you need. Shape Soulmeld requires you to choose a single soulmeld that can't be changed.

[willpell]

Here's a link (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=11235.0)

Thanks! :)

[eggs]

I can see a few uses for Bind Vestige -

Amon 's ram is a relatively rare natural attack for a feat slot - potentially useful for Totemists, Psychic Warriors or other multiattack builds.
Aym's Ruinous Attack is amazing for sunderers (but I get the impression that I'm the only player who'd care)
Naberius has a vital ability for diplomancers, a useful one for bardic knack users (not RAW-friendly though :smallfrown:), and ability healing which is desirable for ability self-damagers like Sanctified spellcasters and Hellfire Warlocks (I believe it also plays nicely with ability burn, which gives it a unique niche in certain psionic builds).
Ronove's Fist isn't anything special, but it's an extra 1.5 damage over Improved Unarmed Strike, for anyone that needs it for prereqs or something.

And then there are all the miscellaneous optimization-orthogonal abilities like permanent Featherfall, Dwarven Step, Ricochet Shot, Disguise Self, Fire Resistance 10 and Low-Light/Darkvision, which are way more interesting than most powerless-but-fun feats. That's mixed praise, but since probably 80% of WotC feats fall into that category, I don't think it's invalid.

None of it's really astoundingly useful, but I think it does tend to fall in line with Shape Soulmeld's usefulness - barring characters with an essentia reserve (Azurin Clerics, etc.), anyway.

[willpell]

I can see a few uses for Bind Vestige -

Amon 's ram is a relatively rare natural attack for two feat slots

Fixed. I was almost gonna ewe about Amon in my previous post, as an example of how you mostly don't get the good abilities with this feat. If you only have BV and not IBV, Amon gives you Darkvision. Snoooore. Particularly sad given that he's the one who's finicky about what other Vestiges you can use that week.

Also Bind Vestige has the same problem I have with the Binder class in general - you take one level or one feat, and suddenly every Vestige in the entire campaign world is on your Speed-Dial. I would really rather that the feat gave you one and only one Vestige, but gave you its full power. And I wouldn't mind if it broke the mold on 24-hour pactings by saying the Vestige lives in you full-time. (Doing this with Ronove would be somewhat problematic of course.)

One of these days when I have time and much better system mastery, I really want to reengineer Binder into a totally new class that handles the vestige more like a partnership instead of a swappable powerset. For now I'm lazy and will stick with RAW, but I've never been fond of the "pick your powers for the day" shtick with wizards and clerics and such.


Aym's Ruinous Attack is amazing for sunderers (but I get the impression that I'm the only player who'd care)

I've never thought sundering seemed worth the bother, but this makes me a little sad - I'd be interested in seeing it come up a bit more often, but as DM I don't want to bother calculating HP for objects so it's not something I'd be likely to encourage.


Naberius has a vital ability for diplomancers

Again you're talking IBV. The BV ability is Naberius's Skills, which is of limited relevance at best, since it explicitly forbids you from getting any ranks in the skills you're binding into. Can still be handy for getting a Knowledge (Anything) check, but the DC has to be pretty low since you probably have nothing but your Attribute modifier to use.


and ability healing which is desirable for ability self-damagers

Actually the part of that ability which excites me - you can heal ability drain, which is normally irreversable unless you get a Restoration spell. (Yes, in practice, you always will get a Restoration spell, but I like to pretend that things like maiming and death are actually still serious issues in the gameworld, even though mechanically they're basically just a moderately steep GP fine and maybe a sidequest to find a cleric if they're on the rare side.)


And then there are all the miscellaneous optimization-orthogonal abilities like permanent Featherfall, Dwarven Step

You don't get Dwarven Step even with BP. Taking a feat for Aym gets you double damage to objects; taking two gets you fire resistance. You never get the armor proficiency, Dwarven Step, or the halo of fire. Really, most of the things you get for the feat are pretty boring, although you do get to choose from among them all - one feat for access to Darkvision, Feather Fall, breaking stuff, a slightly better Skill Focus: Hide, and a few almost-ranks in skills that need training, that's not too bad as a Swiss Army knife. But like I said, I'd rather get just one vestige and all its sexy abilities. I really wanna slap Dwarven Step on a Barbarian so I can run 40 feet in full plate, but currently you need to multiclass as an actual Bindarian to pull that off.

[Amphetryon]

Rather than Improved Bind Vestige (technically "Improved Binding"), you mean Practiced Binder, willpell. Please cf. page 74 of Tome of Magic. Improved Bind Vestige grants you a higher level Vestige; Practiced Binder allows you a second power from a bound Vestige.

[eggs]

I just went back to reread that whole huge feat entry and ew. I didn't remember the specifications for which powers it could convey. That's much worse than I'd remembered.

[Yuki Akuma]

Rather than Improved Bind Vestige (technically "Improved Binding"), you mean Practiced Binder, willpell. Please cf. page 74 of Tome of Magic. Improved Bind Vestige grants you a higher level Vestige; Practiced Binder allows you a second power from a bound Vestige.

These feat names should really have been swapped.

[Sutremaine]

Can still be handy for getting a Knowledge (Anything) check, but the DC has to be pretty low since you probably have nothing but your Attribute modifier to use.
You get everything but ranks, which leaves synergy bonuses (for Knowedge: Nature only), typed bonuses, and untyped bonuses. Got a bunch of downtime? Con booster -> Naberius -> +1 Int bonus -> Dantalion -> all the common knowledge!

[The Gilded Duke]

I once played a changeling binder. None of the other players were familiar with binders besides the GM. Every day he could do something different, and every day he would show a different sign, often changing the rest of his appearance as well. My favorite vestige was Dalvher-Nar.

Maddening Moan was great at low levels, and nothing is more hilarious then killing a boss with his own critical hit.

[BIGMamaSloth]

One of these days when I have time and much better system mastery, I really want to reengineer Binder into a totally new class that handles the vestige more like a partnership instead of a swappable powerset. For now I'm lazy and will stick with RAW, but I've never been fond of the "pick your powers for the day" shtick with wizards and clerics and such.

Check out the Knight of the sacred seal prestige class in tome of magic. It's not exactly what you're saying and is a little more martial than standard Binder, but it's based around having a partnership with one particular vestige, which I believe is what you are talking about.

[Sutremaine]

From a mechanical point of view, all you're doing with KotSS is exchanging Binder class features for KotSS class features, and those new class features (except Aligned Strike) happen to be tied to one particular vestige. It's still the same swappable powerset, and I don't think the nonspecific boosts you get from binding your patron vestige are what willpell had in mind.

[JoshuaZ]

One thing I like (and something that is going to be the rule in my upcoming campaign) is that the core ToM vestiges are all known enough that one gets those automatically. But to learn about other vestiges requires quests or talking to binder scholars and the like.

If one wants to focus on a single vestige that much, one can do it. Favored Vestige and Favored Vestige Focus both go a bit in that direction, and you can take both feats very early on. There are also a lot of builds that can focus on a single vestige.

An alternative would be to at level 1 only know how to bind a single vestige. At each level where you would normally increase the number of vestiges you learn a single new vestige to bind with. This would drastically reduce the power level of the class, probably dropping it to T5 or low T4 (Zceryll would be help drag it out of T5), but it is a straightforward solution.

[Agent 451]

...I'd heard there were others and haven't a clue how to find them.

There is also this (http://www.pactmagic.com/download.htm), if you are allowing 3rd party supplements.

[JoshuaZ]

In addition to the online vestiges you've already found, there are a few others.

There are three psionic vestiges (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/psm/20070119a). These are unfortunately very weak because most of their powers run off power points, and they don't get that many. So unless you have another source of power points, these are very weak.


There's also Vanus, part of the excellent article on designing new vestiges (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dd/20060407a)(that article is a major reason for the surprisingly high quality of balance of a lot of the homebrew vestiges).

There's Desharis and Ashtaroth (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20070307a) who are both nice.

There are a few others but they are either in other books(Ashardalon is in Dragon Magic) or are in Dragon Magazine and so are less easily accessible. A full list of all official vestiges is here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=208231) which also discusses which ones work well together and related bits.

[willpell]

I'm asking here rather than in Simple Question because I don't want a literal reading of the rulebook which I have already read, but rather a "what do you think RAI here was" kind of answer. If you have the Ignore Special Requirements feat, can you bind Amon and one of the vestiges he doesn't like? I've been unable to hazard a guess as to whether this list of exclusions was an intentional game balance issue or just enforced flavor.


Check out the Knight of the sacred seal prestige class in tome of magic. It's not exactly what you're saying and is a little more martial than standard Binder, but it's based around having a partnership with one particular vestige, which I believe is what you are talking about.

Flavor-wise you're right that I saw that class and was happy. Whether it's a mechanical match I don't know.

[willpell]

More Binder-specific questions where asking in Simple RAW isn't likely to help me.

1. Karsites can't cast spells, but they can use magic items. Can they UMD a wand or scroll?

2. If a Karsite uses Magic-draining Attack to suppress all the powers of a magic weapon, does that weapon still penetrate his Damage Reduction? I really want to say "no" for flavor reasons more than anything, but I have a sneaky suspicion the RAW answer is "yes". As an aside, I'd also really like it if the effect lasted for longer than 1 round, and am open to suggestions as to what would be a reasonable way of making it last longer; possibilities might include giving up points of damage for a longer duration (for balance), getting a longer duration only on a very damaging hit (for flavor), or tying the duration to someone's save so that they have to make their save by a lot to completely negate the effect, but can shorten it even if their save roll is very low (no idea how to balance this one though, as it's a big departure from the usual binary nature of saves, being more akin to how skill checks are done).

[Yuki Akuma]

I've been unable to hazard a guess as to whether this list of exclusions was an intentional game balance issue or just enforced flavor.


It's just flavour. Like the Paladin and Monk multiclassing rules - there's no game balance issue there.

[JoshuaZ]

I'm asking here rather than in Simple Question because I don't want a literal reading of the rulebook which I have already read, but rather a "what do you think RAI here was" kind of answer. If you have the Ignore Special Requirements feat, can you bind Amon and one of the vestiges he doesn't like? I've been unable to hazard a guess as to whether this list of exclusions was an intentional game balance issue or just enforced flavor.

I'm not aware of any real breakable combinations here, so it may just be flavor. Any advantage in increased flexibility that comes from having those few additional options is made up for by having to pay a feat. I strongly suspect that Ignore Special Requirements was intended to be able to do these combinations.



Karsites can't cast spells, but they can use magic items. Can they UMD a wand or scroll?

Yes. The wording says that "They can use spell-like abilities, psionics powers and magic items normally." The simplest interpretation of that last includes UMD.

[willpell]

So, Playground, your consensus please. Take Favored Vestige at 1st level, for whatever vestige you want to be your "default", and then every time you gain access to a new higher level of vestiges, use the PHB Retraining rules to replace your old Favored Vestige with one of the new ones. Cheesy rules abuse, or a perfectly reasonable way to make the most of your resources?

[Answerer]

Hard to "abuse" the retraining "rules" when they're much closer to guidelines that explicitly require DM approval every step of the way...

Anyway, I think it sounds reasonable; actually, IIRC, the penalties for retraining (XP costs?) are probably too high to be worth it. Sadly, Favored Vestige is not a very good feat.

[willpell]

As usual, I'm my own DM and am asking for guidance on what to do in the absence of an available fiat.

I don't see any XP costs associated with retraining; you just get one opportunity at each level-up. So at level 1 you can take FV: Leraje and walk around with a bow all day, then when you hit level 3 the first thing you do is retrain to FV: Savnok, then add your Binder level and pact with Savnok, and suddenly you're wearing full plate. Then at level 5 it turns into FV: Karsus, and so on up the ladder, until at level 16 or whatever it is, you're exchanging your FV: Marchosias for FV: Halphax. One feat being used as if it were eight; it bugs me on a certain level, but even I have to admit that having a level 6 character still binding Ronove is quite simply disgusting.

(As a side note, Halphax seems MUCH more powerful than Orthos to me; did anyone else get that impression? Orthos is supposed to be the uber-Vestige, but it didn't look to me as though he was very strong. The whirwind breath does a lot of damage, but by that level isn't basically everyone going to have evasion? And I have no idea how strong Whispering Wind is since it's not a combat power and its utility is probably extremely campaign-dependent; could kick butt in some games and be nigh-meaningless in others.)

Given my previously-stated preferences on the topic of binders, it is not surprising that I value FV more highly. Perhaps at later levels it loses much potency, but at level 1, the difference between Amon blasting 10 feet for 1d6 damage or 20 feet for 2d6 damage is pretty massive.

[Answerer]

I don't see any XP costs associated with retraining; you just get one opportunity at each level-up.
Then I mis-remembered. That's fine then.

[eggs]

Seems about as useful as a reserve feat, once you drop the reserve feat's main benefit. In terms of brokenness, I wouldn't think twice about it.

But as far as rule-based legitimacy, it gets a little sketchy. Firstly, while it should be technically possible to retrain the feat into a level 1 feat slot and choose a vestige that wasn't available until level 5, it clearly runs against the spirit of the rule (that specific use of the feat wasn't available the first time the character filled that slot). Secondly, it's not a different feat than itself, so the retraining rules don't apply (they specify "another" feat); this argument is nitpicky, and would be weaselly to rely on.

[Psyren]

I don't see any XP costs associated with retraining; you just get one opportunity at each level-up. So at level 1 you can take FV: Leraje and walk around with a bow all day, then when you hit level 3 the first thing you do is retrain to FV: Savnok, then add your Binder level and pact with Savnok, and suddenly you're wearing full plate. Then at level 5 it turns into FV: Karsus, and so on up the ladder, until at level 16 or whatever it is, you're exchanging your FV: Marchosias for FV: Halphax. One feat being used as if it were eight; it bugs me on a certain level, but even I have to admit that having a level 6 character still binding Ronove is quite simply disgusting.

Am I missing something? Leraje doesn't seem to have any abilities that would benefit from Favored Vestige. Savnok does, but given the EBL needed to make an incremental increase, he doesn't seem like he'd be worth a whole feat either. And since your lower levels are feat-starved anyway (you likely want Improved Binding and Ignore Special Requirements at a minimum, in addition to any PrC prereqs etc.) I don't see much room in there for FV of the lower-level guys in any event.

I can see it being useful for Amon but a short 2d6 line once or twice per encounter is still iffy feat-wise.

[willpell]

But as far as rule-based legitimacy, it gets a little sketchy. Firstly, while it should be technically possible to retrain the feat into a level 1 feat slot and choose a vestige that wasn't available until level 5, it clearly runs against the spirit of the rule (that specific use of the feat wasn't available the first time the character filled that slot). Secondly, it's not a different feat than itself, so the retraining rules don't apply (they specify "another" feat); this argument is nitpicky, and would be weaselly to rely on.

Both good points, but workarounds are possible. A straight Binder 20 gets feats at 1, 3, 4, 6, i think 7, 9, i think 11, 12, 15 and 18. At 3 he gains access to level 2 vestiges, so he can take an FV for one of those while retraining his original FV into whatever he would have otherwise taken at 3. With one retraining opp every single level, this translates to one feat retrained into itself every two levels - which is pretty close to the rate you gain new vestiges.


Am I missing something? Leraje doesn't seem to have any abilities that would benefit from Favored Vestige.

You're right, she doesn't (a fact that I've noted with some irritation before, so I feel dumb having forgotten now).


Savnok does, but given the EBL needed to make an incremental increase, he doesn't seem like he'd be worth a whole feat either. And since your lower levels are feat-starved anyway (you likely want Improved Binding and Ignore Special Requirements at a minimum, in addition to any PrC prereqs etc.) I don't see much room in there for FV of the lower-level guys in any event.

I'm a low-op player so all this is pretty irrelevant to me. I often don't take feats that you "must" take because I prioritize flavorful and interesting character quirks over efficiency. ISR is sometimes useful but often takes away from the "Binder Experience" that I enjoy (the flavor-heaviness of the class is far and away my favorite aspect of it, and the only way I want to skip the SpRqs is if they're kinda dumb or disproportionately difficult, which is only true of a couple examples). And I intentionally am steering clear of Improved Binding just to limit the option paralysis until I'm familiar with all the vestiges (though that day is rapidly approaching, 32 is really not very many to learn about).

On another subject, what the holy flying hell is the deal with the Bind Vestige feat? Did they intentionally set out to make it as fail as possible? I tried really, really hard to come up with character concepts that might be enriched by that little table of legal options, but even as low-op as I am, I draw the line at spending three feats to gain Weapon Proficiency: Axes. (Bind Vestige, Improved Binding to get access to Haagenti, Practiced Binder to get her second ability.) Even spending a single feat for Darkvision or Feather Fall seems absurd, even aside from the risk of a poor pact or not being able to draw a seal. I think I figured out about six or eight characters that I could maybe make using BV - ever. And only two of them could do it without IB or PB, if not both.

Given how awfully mis-written the other two sections of TOM were, I think it might be reasonable to guess that the fact that Binder actually turned out well was something of a fluke, and that Bind Vestige is a...well, "vestige"...of an earlier version of the Pact Magic system, perhaps not intending there to be a Binder class at all at that stage of the design, but instead designing this system from the ground up where you'd negotiate for a single ability at a time and had to take a long chain of feats to get any options with it. Overall, I'm very inclined to consider TOM the same way that I do Magic of Incarnum - a bold experiment that didn't quite work right, requiring a lot of homebrew work to render satisfactory, but with enough unmitigated awesomeness to be worth the effort.

[Yuki Akuma]

Don't be silly. Binders get 2nd level vestiges at level 1, and just don't get a feat at first level unless they're human.

Just like Swordsages can ready all of their maneuvers as a full round action and don't get a feat at first level, and all Druids can cast spells in wildshape and don't get a feat at sixth level. :smallwink:

[Psyren]

I'm a low-op player so all this is pretty irrelevant to me. I often don't take feats that you "must" take because I prioritize flavorful and interesting character quirks over efficiency.

And I have no problem with this, but Favored Vestige doesn't give you anything flavorful or interesting either. +1 EBL for a feat isn't exactly a slam-dunk fluffwise,


ISR is sometimes useful but often takes away from the "Binder Experience" that I enjoy (the flavor-heaviness of the class is far and away my favorite aspect of it, and the only way I want to skip the SpRqs is if they're kinda dumb or disproportionately difficult, which is only true of a couple examples). And I intentionally am steering clear of Improved Binding just to limit the option paralysis until I'm familiar with all the vestiges (though that day is rapidly approaching, 32 is really not very many to learn about).

Eh... for me, the real "Binder Experience" comes from the signs and influences. The SRs are just a chore to keep track of - there's no thematic rhyme or reason to why certain vestiges hate each other (even the book itself admits this) and requirements like Leraje or Halphax might even be impossible at the start of a campaign.



On another subject, what the holy flying hell is the deal with the Bind Vestige feat? Did they intentionally set out to make it as fail as possible? I tried really, really hard to come up with character concepts that might be enriched by that little table of legal options, but even as low-op as I am, I draw the line at spending three feats to gain Weapon Proficiency: Axes. (Bind Vestige, Improved Binding to get access to Haagenti, Practiced Binder to get her second ability.) Even spending a single feat for Darkvision or Feather Fall seems absurd, even aside from the risk of a poor pact or not being able to draw a seal. I think I figured out about six or eight characters that I could maybe make using BV - ever. And only two of them could do it without IB or PB, if not both.

There are turkeys there, it's true, but there's also some good stuff too. Karsus is an decent choice for artificers/wandificers as the bonus is untyped; Aym is a wonderful addition to a dedicated sundering build; Dahlver-Nar actually makes Wild Rager Barbarians playable; Focalor's Aura is effectively +2 melee AC and +2 to all your DCs etc. They're not showstoppers by any means but they're not totally awful either.


Overall, I'm very inclined to consider TOM the same way that I do Magic of Incarnum - a bold experiment that didn't quite work right, requiring a lot of homebrew work to render satisfactory, but with enough unmitigated awesomeness to be worth the effort.

Well, Incarnum at least is batting 2/3, which is one better than ToM :smalltongue:

Yeah I wish WotC had executed on both books better too. Maybe the supposed 3.5 reprint will help, or maybe I'm getting my hopes up...

[willpell]

Don't be silly. Binders get 2nd level vestiges at level 1, and just don't get a feat at first level unless they're human. Just like Swordsages can ready all of their maneuvers as a full round action and don't get a feat at first level, and all Druids can cast spells in wildshape and don't get a feat at sixth level. :smallwink:

Bah I say.


And I have no problem with this, but Favored Vestige doesn't give you anything flavorful or interesting either. +1 EBL for a feat isn't exactly a slam-dunk fluffwise.

Well what I want is a separate Binding class where you only get one vestige at first level and then learn additional ones the way an Erudite learns powers, with both in-game and XP requirements; what it would take to make such a class work I'm not sure. EBL of 5 for that single vestige? Probably overpowered.


Eh... for me, the real "Binder Experience" comes from the signs and influences. The SRs are just a chore to keep track of - there's no thematic rhyme or reason to why certain vestiges hate each other (even the book itself admits this) and requirements like Leraje or Halphax might even be impossible at the start of a campaign.

Leraje is one of the nasty ones, utterly out of proportion to her potency as a vestige (the intro fluff implies she had the power to conjure arrows at one point, that would have made it far more fitting). Amon I dunno, the specific choices of vestiges to hate seem random, but the general idea of some vestiges (especially Amon, whose title I changed in my game to The Voice of Wrath) hating others and refusing to share a soul with them seems extremely fitting. I had thought it might be a hamfisted balance fix; certainly there probably are some overly powerful vestige combinations that could be short-circuted by simply saying those vestiges hate each other.

Examples of vestiges where I don't think it should be possible to avoid the SpRq:
* Marchosias. A "king of killers" answering the call of a goody-two-shoes character just because she took the right feat? Grrrr. Savnok is the same deal but much less "uber" thematically, so I don't feel as strongly on the topic.
* Geryon, Ipos, and Naberius all require certain Skill ranks to indicate that they will only manifest for a binder who they think is "good enough". This requirement should never be bypassable IMO, any more than you should be able to qualify for a PrC without having the required Skills. (Admittedly some PrCs put more thought into those skill requirements than others.)
* Haagenti. Language requirements are very fitting for Binders since you have to be able to speak to the vestige; while many vestiges can adapt to any language you speak, it makes sense that a few could not. Being able to disregard this requirement if you're Large makes some sense given the specific language in question.
* Acerak. His manifestation is written on the assumption you've placed a gem, and has to be adjusted if you didn't. Given the historical association between death and wealth, it's an extremely fitting parallel and I like preserving it. Halphax and Orthos are other examples where the manifestation has to be completely rethought if you don't follow the SpRq. Ronove is a weird case; the requirement for soil makes sense but the requirement for an open sky does not.


Dahlver-Nar actually makes Wild Rager Barbarians playable

Who?


Well, Incarnum at least is batting 2/3, which is one better than ToM :smalltongue:

That's if you don't count the Shadowcaster fix that the original author later posted on his website, in which case only the Truenamer remains awful. (And of course Zaq wrote a wonderful guide to making the most of that one, proving that once again the worst can sometimes be the best in another since, much as MST3K did for movies.)

[JoshuaZ]

* Marchosias. A "king of killers" answering the call of a goody-two-shoes character just because she took the right feat? Grrrr. Savnok is the same deal but much less "uber" thematically, so I don't feel as strongly on the topic.
* Geryon, Ipos, and Naberius all require certain Skill ranks to indicate that they will only manifest for a binder who they think is "good enough". This requirement should never be bypassable IMO, any more than you should be able to qualify for a PrC without having the required Skills. (Admittedly some PrCs put more thought into those skill requirements than others.)
* Haagenti. Language requirements are very fitting for Binders since you have to be able to speak to the vestige; while many vestiges can adapt to any language you speak, it makes sense that a few could not. Being able to disregard this requirement if you're Large makes some sense given the specific language in question.
* Acerak. His manifestation is written on the assumption you've placed a gem, and has to be adjusted if you didn't. Given the historical association between death and wealth, it's an extremely fitting parallel and I like preserving it. Halphax and Orthos are other examples where the manifestation has to be completely rethought if you don't follow the SpRq. Ronove is a weird case; the requirement for soil makes sense but the requirement for an open sky does not.


You can fluff these pretty well. To some extent Ignore Special Requirements may be reducing the amount of choice that the vestiges have. Remember, vestiges are desperate to make pacts. You may have forced or tricked the vestige. In the cases of Ipos and Naberius, there fluff justifies this further since even if the feat normally does something like that, Ipos may well consider learning how to control vestiges that effectively to be a strong indication of scholarly learning, while Naberius may see it as akin to being skilled at bluffing.

The issue of special requirements and how the vestiges manifest is a minor one and easy to refluff- say a gem appears on the ground at the start of the display and then does everything it would do normally. The others can be similarly described with minimal work.

[willpell]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a level 1 binder with Improved Binding has an EBL of 1 for all purposes other than being able to bind level-2 Vestiges. So if you bind Savnok this way, you don't get masterwork full plate (listed as "EBL 2-4" on the table), but just regular full plate, right?

Also, Heavy Armor Proficiency is not listed as one of the abilities you can gain from Improved Bind Vestige and Practiced Binder, so a character with no other source of HAP who binds Savnok is going to be staggering around in armor he doesn't know how to wear, correct? Just making sure; I'm tempted to do this on purpose just for the lulz.

[Psyren]

Well what I want is a separate Binding class where you only get one vestige at first level and then learn additional ones the way an Erudite learns powers, with both in-game and XP requirements; what it would take to make such a class work I'm not sure. EBL of 5 for that single vestige? Probably overpowered.

Vestiges aren't powerful enough for that if you ask me. If you forced players to learn a small number rather than giving them the whole toolbox to choose from, you'd end up with the majority of Binders looking awfully similar to one another, just like you would if you forced Incarnates/Totemists to have soulmelds known.

Instead, having access to all of them lets you try being a crafting Binder, rogue-y Binder, warrior Binder, etc. all with the same build, enc



Leraje is one of the nasty ones, utterly out of proportion to her potency as a vestige (the intro fluff implies she had the power to conjure arrows at one point, that would have made it far more fitting). Amon I dunno, the specific choices of vestiges to hate seem random, but the general idea of some vestiges (especially Amon, whose title I changed in my game to The Voice of Wrath) hating others and refusing to share a soul with them seems extremely fitting. I had thought it might be a hamfisted balance fix; certainly there probably are some overly powerful vestige combinations that could be short-circuted by simply saying those vestiges hate each other.

Mechanically, I have no problem with forcing a feat tax to gain the freedom of doing any vestige combo. I just wish the fluff was a bit more intuitive on this point, because otherwise it's a difficult-to-remember layer of additional bookkeeping for the DM. Even something simple like "I bind Buer to heal us up" would require the DM to remember that the player can't do that in a dungeon, and is even more difficult if the player had been doing that in every previous (outdoor) battle. Similarly, who's going to remember that you need liquid (ink/blood) to bind Focalor?



Examples of vestiges where I don't think it should be possible to avoid the SpRq:
*snip*

But here you are violating the overriding fluff of vestiges - they are (a) totally amoral, and (b) absolutely crave contact with the world. One of the best components to Binder fluff is that the alignment of the Binder, nor of the vestige during life, matters - this provides a sharp and much-needed distinction between them and clerics.

ISR has no fluff of its own - but based on the above, we can easily devise something to fit the mechanics. Perhaps it represents your ability to trick the vestige, making yourself seem versed on a subject you don't fully understand - this happens more than often enough in the real world. (We know that tricking vestiges is possible thanks to Anima Mage.) Or perhaps it represents additional force of will/salesmanship in getting the vestige to set aside its peculiarities for the chance to gain it's true desire, i.e. experiencing reality through its host. It could even represent an expansion of your soul, allowing vestiges the chance to experience more of reality than they could through a normal binder, a tasty prospect that causes them to forego their normal compunctions.

To your specific complaints:

- Marchosias: this one is trivial. Write an incidence of infidelity into your backstory ("I cheated on my first girlfriend!") and you're good to go, no feat needed. Or steal your party member's sock - you can even tell them you did it and why, so long as you don't apologize or give them a new hat. So spending a feat instead is more than fair.

- Skill-vestiges: As I mentioned above, there's no fluff for ISR, so for the skill-based vestiges you can go hog-wild. Any of the three possibilities I mentioned above (trickery, brow-beating, or enticing) could excuse a less learned binder gaining the allegiance of the skill-based vestiges.

- Haagenti: ToM makes it clear that the binding process doesn't require speech at all after calling the vestige's name, both mechanically (supernatural abilities have no verbal components) and fluff-wise (if roleplayed at all, it can take the form of a "staring match or psychic contest" for instance.) Here again, ISR can be refluffed to involve one of these other two binding forms instead of a verbal entreaty.

- Acererak: no minimum value is given for the "gem," so borrowing a bit of quartz from your mage buddy's component pouch (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wallOfIce.htm) or even just walking around with one yourself would also forego the need for a feat, so this isn't much of a barrier either.

- Orthos: The bright light has little to do with his manifestation, especially since Orthos is "undetectable by any sense." So I'm not sure what you mean when you say his manifestation has to be rethought. (It is related to his influence, but again ISR represents your ability to force the vestiges to get over their nits.)

- Halphax: The corner is only needed for him to walk "onto camera" if you will, which isn't a deal-breaker as he can do that from anywhere. Just imagine a trap-door opening in the floor if you don't want him fading in from thin air.



Who?

Sorry about that, that's actually a Pathfinder archetype (similar to Frenzied Berserker.) It duplicates FB's "chance to ruin the party's day" mechanic by making the Barbarian confused, a drawback that being able to bind D-N would negate. In a game where 3.5 feats would be allowed though it would be very useful.



That's if you don't count the Shadowcaster fix that the original author later posted on his website, in which case only the Truenamer remains awful. (And of course Zaq wrote a wonderful guide to making the most of that one, proving that once again the worst can sometimes be the best in another since, much as MST3K did for movies.)

Was only going off the books; if you allow homebrew fixes, MoI is batting 3/3 also.


Correct me if I'm wrong, but a level 1 binder with Improved Binding has an EBL of 1 for all purposes other than being able to bind level-2 Vestiges. So if you bind Savnok this way, you don't get masterwork full plate (listed as "EBL 2-4" on the table), but just regular full plate, right?

Yes, that's correct.



Also, Heavy Armor Proficiency is not listed as one of the abilities you can gain from Improved Bind Vestige and Practiced Binder, so a character with no other source of HAP who binds Savnok is going to be staggering around in armor he doesn't know how to wear, correct? Just making sure; I'm tempted to do this on purpose just for the lulz.

Also correct, so if you can't gain access to Savnok's full powers (i.e. you have no Binder levels) it would behoove you to use a class that gains HAP before thinking about picking him up.

But for a low-wealth, low-level game, being able to summon/dismiss full-plate at-will is pretty studly even if you can't beef it up the way a full Binder could.

[willpell]

Vestiges aren't powerful enough for that if you ask me. If you forced players to learn a small number rather than giving them the whole toolbox to choose from, you'd end up with the majority of Binders looking awfully similar to one another, just like you would if you forced Incarnates/Totemists to have soulmelds known.

Incarnate soulmelds always did strike me as a bit weak. Much as with vestiges, I'd rather that they were twice as powerful but you had half as many to juggle among, and 2 is not the only value possible in that equation.


Instead, having access to all of them lets you try being a crafting Binder, rogue-y Binder, warrior Binder, etc. all with the same build, enc

Really I'd rather those be separate characters. Though admittedly this is the perspective of someone populating a world with NPCs which are treated as PCs, and doesn't get stuck actually playing the same one day in and day out in a campaign - I can see the appeal of Chameleon-style classes there. But by my standards, there's no point in designing a class to function that way; instead, a player who wants to have an ever-changing experience where he can do anything he wants ought to just play freeform.

The Factotum very nearly does exactly that, apart from needing to prepare spells; he can switch among skills and attacks pretty much willy-nilly. But with Binder, Incarnate, or for that matter Cleric, you have to read this immense list of powers before you know of even one thing that your character can do (and Binder is the only one of those three where your list isn't inconveniently interlaced with the lists of several other classes, and even in Binder's case they couldn't do anything as helpful as putting them in order from 1st to 8th so you could find all the beginning ones right away). That is why I want more Sorcerer-esque classes for Pact Magic and Incarnum; the Sorcerer is undisputably weaker than the Wizard, but he's much easier to finish building and start playing, and when you get bored with him you can just build a new character with equal ease and play that. I consider this a much better game model than the "do I want to spend eight days figuring out how to optomize a wizard so he can do anything, or do I want to spend eight days figuring out how to optomize a cleric so he can do anything, or do I want to spend eight days figuring out how to optomize a druid so he can do anything? Boy I sure love having choices" schtick that D&D seems to have run with.


Mechanically, I have no problem with forcing a feat tax to gain the freedom of doing any vestige combo. I just wish the fluff was a bit more intuitive on this point, because otherwise it's a difficult-to-remember layer of additional bookkeeping for the DM. Even something simple like "I bind Buer to heal us up" would require the DM to remember that the player can't do that in a dungeon, and is even more difficult if the player had been doing that in every previous (outdoor) battle. Similarly, who's going to remember that you need liquid (ink/blood) to bind Focalor?

Well I'd have little trouble remembering Focalor at least; he's the prince of tears so it makes sense that you have to write his seal in tears or some stand-in therefore. Remembering exactly what Focalor does is harder - I know he's got an "aura of sadness" but I'd have to look at the book to know what stats are affected by that aura. The flavor-first focus of Vestiges is very good at creating recognition, and I'd rather there weren't so many nitty-gritty details to slow the process down.


But here you are violating the overriding fluff of vestiges - they are (a) totally amoral, and (b) absolutely crave contact with the world. One of the best components to Binder fluff is that the alignment of the Binder, nor of the vestige during life, matters - this provides a sharp and much-needed distinction between them and clerics.

I have to squint to see any similarity between Clerics and Binders in the first place. Sure they're built on the same chassis, but clerics are mostly about healing, while none of the vestiges you can get at 1st level, even with Improved Binding does any healing at all (unless you count Naberius repairing ability damage, which is not usually something you take at level 1). Whether they turn into pseudo-clerics later is irrelevant; it's what they can do when you first start playing them which defines what they're all about.


ISR has no fluff of its own - but based on the above, we can easily devise something to fit the mechanics.

See, I would much rather design new mechanics to fit the existing fluff.


Perhaps it represents your ability to trick the vestige, making yourself seem versed on a subject you don't fully understand - this happens more than often enough in the real world. Or perhaps it represents additional force of will/salesmanship in getting the vestige to set aside its peculiarities for the chance to gain it's true desire, i.e. experiencing reality through its host.

See the thing is, the vestige won't even show up if you don't meet its requirement unless you have ISR. So ISR can't represent some way of persuading it to overlook the breach of protocol; it would be like calling someone without dialing their phone number, no amount of persuasive power will make it happen.


It could even represent an expansion of your soul, allowing vestiges the chance to experience more of reality than they could through a normal binder, a tasty prospect that causes them to forego their normal compunctions.

That could work, but it still dilutes the individuality of the vestiges. Why would they all behave the same way in any given situation? The more you focus on their mechanics, the more they seem like arbitrary power templates rather than actual beings.


- Marchosias: this one is trivial. Write an incidence of infidelity into your backstory ("I cheated on my first girlfriend!") and you're good to go, no feat needed. Or steal your party member's sock - you can even tell them you did it and why, so long as you don't apologize or give them a new hat. So spending a feat instead is more than fair.

I believe you're thinking of Savnok here. Marchosias requires an evil act; cheating on your girlfriend would be unlikely to count, stealing a trivial item from a buddy almost definitely wouldn't. That's Chaotic at worst. Evil is the desire to cause harm, not minor annoyance but genuine injury or misery or depravity. You're not going to get a King of Killers on your side by messing up somebody's hair or whatnot.


- Acererak: no minimum value is given for the "gem," so borrowing a bit of quartz from your mage buddy's component pouch (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/wallOfIce.htm) or even just walking around with one yourself would also forego the need for a feat, so this isn't much of a barrier either.

Quartz is not a gem, just a crystal. Gems have to be somewhat valuable; garnet or topaz probably counts, but a fairly ordinary sparkly rock wouldn't.


- Orthos: The bright light has little to do with his manifestation, especially since Orthos is "undetectable by any sense." So I'm not sure what you mean when you say his manifestation has to be rethought.

It's a point of blackness that appears in midair; if you were already in the dark you couldn't see it. Which would be lame. Granted with Darkvision it works; I'd be more comfortable with a dwarf or drow ignoring that requirement, just so they can plotz themselves when they find some darkness they can't see through. (And yes such things do exist and you've probably encountered them by the time you can summon Orthos. Details.)


- Halphax: The corner is only needed for him to walk "onto camera" if you will, which isn't a deal-breaker as he can do that from anywhere. Just imagine a trap-door opening in the floor if you don't want him fading in from thin air.[/spoiler]

That is a pretty good suggestion, I'll give you that.

[quote]Was only going off the books; if you allow homebrew fixes, MoI is batting 3/3 also.

No, I wasn't allowing "homebrew" fixes; this was by the author of the Shadowcaster section of ToM. It's not "official" only because the company didn't stamp it, probably more to avoid setting a precedent about obsoleting their own books than because they actually disagreed or anything.


But for a low-wealth, low-level game, being able to summon/dismiss full-plate at-will is pretty studly even if you can't beef it up the way a full Binder could.

Indeed, that's basically all Savnok does at low levels, but it's pretty cool all by itself. Unlike IB'ing Amon so you can gain Darkvision...whoopie.

[Pyromancer999]

To make up for the lack of official vestiges, there was a huge thread (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19539322/lets_make_some_new_vestiges&post_num=451)on the WoTC forums that I think had literally hundreds of homebrewed vestiges, including Banjo from OOTS. :smalltongue:

In the few instances of actual binder characters I've seen, they usually use at least one of the vestiges from that thread.

[JoshuaZ]

I have to squint to see any similarity between Clerics and Binders in the first place. Sure they're built on the same chassis, but clerics are mostly about healing, while none of the vestiges you can get at 1st level, even with Improved Binding does any healing at all (unless you count Naberius repairing ability damage, which is not usually something you take at level 1). Whether they turn into pseudo-clerics later is irrelevant; it's what they can do when you first start playing them which defines what they're all about.

The point is that it distinguishes clerics and binders in terms of what sort of entities they care about and what they do. Both interact with otherworldly entities. The desperation and amorality of vestiges makes them very different from deities.

[Psyren]

Long post inc:



Incarnate soulmelds always did strike me as a bit weak. Much as with vestiges, I'd rather that they were twice as powerful but you had half as many to juggle among, and 2 is not the only value possible in that equation.

We may have to agree to disagree here. The classes are already T3 long before you get access to the maximum amount of vestiges/soulmelds able to be bound, so making these components individually more powerful would risk pushing them closer to the top of that range. There are individual melds and vestiges that could use a boost, yes, but the classes themselves are fine.


Really I'd rather those be separate characters.

Agree to disagree again - the whole draw of these two classes is that they are functional mimics. And they go beyond a Factotum in this regard too, who needs fairly obscure/potentially unthematic material to be good at certain roles, e.g. Iaijutsu Focus and a quickrazor for melee combat. He's certainly more capable at certain roles than a rogue, but is still primarily a scoundrel at heart, while "scoundrel" is but one of a Binder or Incarnate's many possible side-jobs.

And no; "he ought to just play freeform" is not valid at all. Freeform requires much more work on both the player and the DM's part to make sure the mechanics are balanced, consistent and fun for both parties - which to me is just needlessly reinventing the wheel when the existing classes are already at the sweet spot of T3.



But with Binder, Incarnate, or for that matter Cleric, you have to read this immense list of powers before you know of even one thing that your character can do (and Binder is the only one of those three where your list isn't inconveniently interlaced with the lists of several other classes, and even in Binder's case they couldn't do anything as helpful as putting them in order from 1st to 8th so you could find all the beginning ones right away). That is why I want more Sorcerer-esque classes for Pact Magic and Incarnum; the Sorcerer is undisputably weaker than the Wizard, but he's much easier to finish building and start playing, and when you get bored with him you can just build a new character with equal ease and play that. I consider this a much better game model than the "do I want to spend eight days figuring out how to optomize a wizard so he can do anything, or do I want to spend eight days figuring out how to optomize a cleric so he can do anything, or do I want to spend eight days figuring out how to optomize a druid so he can do anything? Boy I sure love having choices" schtick that D&D seems to have run with.

A valid complaint, and one that I share; no class should need a handbook to be played effectively. But I chalk that up to poor editing/organization rather than a failure of class design. The fact that the community was able to come together and bang out handbooks on the Binder and Incarnate proves that these classes can be understood, i.e. the information you need IS there. Therefore, how long it takes to do that depends on the reader. (Certainly it doesn't take me 8 days to optimize a Druid/Wizard/Cleric, for instance.)



Well I'd have little trouble remembering Focalor at least; he's the prince of tears so it makes sense that you have to write his seal in tears or some stand-in therefore.

But how often do you see "Prince of Tears" added to his name in Binder builds or other forum discussions? I certainly don't see it often. Nor are tears often thought of as a writing medium ("Prince of Ink" would be much more intuitive, if not as cool.) Nor does that method help very much with the others - "The Green Herald" doesn't make you think "oh yeah, I need to break a special arrow every time I want to summon this chick," for instance.



I have to squint to see any similarity between Clerics and Binders in the first place.

They both entreat with extraplanar entities for comparatively easy power; that's a pretty strong thematic connection I'd say.



See, I would much rather design new mechanics to fit the existing fluff.

There IS no existing fluff - that's the point. Ignore Special Requirements is given no justification other than "so yeah, you can do this now."



See the thing is, the vestige won't even show up if you don't meet its requirement unless you have ISR. So ISR can't represent some way of persuading it to overlook the breach of protocol; it would be like calling someone without dialing their phone number, no amount of persuasive power will make it happen.

I don't quite agree with this analogy; they know you're calling, they just refuse to answer if you don't meet the requirements - or unless what you offer (ISR) is enough of a draw for them to overlook it. It's more like you CAN call them, and your number shows up on their caller ID, and they decide whether to take it depending on how much they want to talk to you anyway. Either fulfilling their requirements, or having ISR, makes them willing to pick up the phone.


That could work, but it still dilutes the individuality of the vestiges. Why would they all behave the same way in any given situation?

Because they all want the same thing - experiencing reality via soul-sharing. As long as the Binder's soul is strong enough to host them (i.e. high enough level), they're interested. Get ISR, and they're interested enough to overlook their requirement. (Or you fool them into thinking you satisfied it - again, the fluff is silent on the issue.)

The common thread among all of them is that they're junkies - a defining characteristic of junkies is that they behave predictably when it comes to the subject of their addiction.



I believe you're thinking of Savnok here.

Nope:

"Special Requirement: To summon Marchosias, you must at some point in your life have committed an evil act for which you have not apologized, atoned, or made reparations. Lying or breaking a confidence doesn't count, but other small acts of evil -such as theft, infidelity or vandalism - do fulfill the requirement."
requirement.


Quartz is not a gem, just a crystal.

Nope: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quartz) in fact, two stones commonly considered "gems" are merely varieties of quartz - amethyst and citrine.


Gems have to be somewhat valuable; garnet or topaz probably counts, but a fairly ordinary sparkly rock wouldn't.

Value is subjective, depending not just on the stone itself, but on things like cut and polish. A raw gemstone is still a gemstone, and with no minimum value or other parameters given, can satisfy the requirements regardless of commonality.


It's a point of blackness that appears in midair; if you were already in the dark you couldn't see it. Which would be lame.

It doesn't matter if you can't see the blackness, because you can't see him anyway:

"In the sudden silence, an unseen, unheard, yet palpable presence slides out of the black aperture and hovers heavily over the seal. Though not detectable by any sense, Orthos is eerily extant, and its presence can be felt by even the dumbest of beasts."

You still know when he's there, when to start talking etc. The bright light is there for his benefit because he hates the dark (see his influence), not yours - which, following my fluff explanation, ISR allows you to waive with e.g. a sufficiently tantalizing soul to occupy.



No, I wasn't allowing "homebrew" fixes; this was by the author of the Shadowcaster section of ToM. It's not "official" only because the company didn't stamp it, probably more to avoid setting a precedent about obsoleting their own books than because they actually disagreed or anything.

I know that Ari wrote the fix, and I point people to it all the time. But calling it homebrew isn't inaccurate either, especially since he wrote two versions (the second of which came out due to community feedback on the first.)

[willpell]

But how often do you see "Prince of Tears" added to his name in Binder builds or other forum discussions?

As usual this is me being weird, but personally I prefer to drop the proper name and just use the title (although some of the titles suck and I change them, but you can usually guess what the one I changed was, assuming it's one in the book - case in point, "The Voice of Wrath", three guesses).


"The Green Herald" doesn't make you think "oh yeah, I need to break a special arrow every time I want to summon this chick," for instance.

Agreed, that's not one of the better ones either. I might change it, but since she is one of the more annoying vestiges (having NO variables that depend on your binder level, so she never gets better after level 1), I might rather just homebrew a completely new Vestige based on her backstory which replaces her in my game.


Because they all want the same thing - experiencing reality via soul-sharing. As long as the Binder's soul is strong enough to host them (i.e. high enough level), they're interested. Get ISR, and they're interested enough to overlook their requirement. (Or you fool them into thinking you satisfied it - again, the fluff is silent on the issue.)

Well-put. Perhaps if I had read the entire book this would be clearer, but as usual I skipped over stuff that looked less necesary and focused on what would let me build a character.

[Ernir]

The thing that bugs me the most about Binders' versatility is feats.

Getting better at a role in 3.5 usually means spending feats on it. And those feats stay the same no matter how many Vestiges you switch out. Want to switch from chopping things up with ChupaChups and Ipos to binding Karsus and getting some wand mojo running? Sorry, you had to spend feats on getting halfway decent at melee, and they will stay that way. =/

And building around it a pain in the butt, at least for me.

[willpell]

Thinking aloud, I'm imagining a made-for-me vestige "sorcerer" class might sound something like this: At 1st level you choose two level 1 vestiges. You can switch between them as a standard action, and one or the other is always in effect, no need for a daily pact (you have their seals tattooed on your body or something). As you level up, you add extra vestiges to your repetoire, probably one every second level with the same progression in max vestige level, so you probably collect one of every level of vestige (maybe put off levels 7 and 8 until 17 and 19 since there are only two of each to choose from). Each vestige has specific sets of extra bonuses associated, modeled off of Pact Augmentation and Soul Guardian but slightly ahead of the binder's progression within each individual set, so there's less flexibility but similar or slightly greater power, and switching between the vestiges lets you change things up in mid-fight. A progression similar to the Divine Mind's auras allows you to switch vestiges faster, and a progression similar to the Binder's eventually allows you to have more than one on at a time. BAB and good saves can be adjusted for balance as necessary. All this is just off the top of my head of course.

[Amphetryon]

Thinking aloud, I'm imagining a made-for-me vestige "sorcerer" class might sound something like this: At 1st level you choose two level 1 vestiges. You can switch between them as a standard action, and one or the other is always in effect, no need for a daily pact (you have their seals tattooed on your body or something). As you level up, you add extra vestiges to your repetoire, probably one every second level with the same progression in max vestige level, so you probably collect one of every level of vestige (maybe put off levels 7 and 8 until 17 and 19 since there are only two of each to choose from). Each vestige has specific sets of extra bonuses associated, modeled off of Pact Augmentation and Soul Guardian but slightly ahead of the binder's progression within each individual set, so there's less flexibility but similar or slightly greater power, and switching between the vestiges lets you change things up in mid-fight. A progression similar to the Divine Mind's auras allows you to switch vestiges faster, and a progression similar to the Binder's eventually allows you to have more than one on at a time. BAB and good saves can be adjusted for balance as necessary. All this is just off the top of my head of course.
Sounds like Incarnum.

[MeeposFire]

To make up for the lack of official vestiges, there was a huge thread (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19539322/lets_make_some_new_vestiges&post_num=451)on the WoTC forums that I think had literally hundreds of homebrewed vestiges, including Banjo from OOTS. :smalltongue:

In the few instances of actual binder characters I've seen, they usually use at least one of the vestiges from that thread.

I loved that thread! My favorite was the Spinal Tap Vestige.

[Psyren]

The thing that bugs me the most about Binders' versatility is feats.

Getting better at a role in 3.5 usually means spending feats on it. And those feats stay the same no matter how many Vestiges you switch out. Want to switch from chopping things up with ChupaChups and Ipos to binding Karsus and getting some wand mojo running? Sorry, you had to spend feats on getting halfway decent at melee, and they will stay that way. =/

And building around it a pain in the butt, at least for me.

The counterpoint is that Binders can get stuff for free through their vestiges that other classes (especially lower-tier ones) would have to spend feats on or dip levels to get. For instance, a Binder can get pounce, turn undead, sneak attack/sudden strike, crafting feats, weapon/armor proficiencies, even effective wizard levels from vestiges alone.

And honestly, all they need to be decent at melee is Knight of the Sacred Seal. Literally everything else is optional, leaving you a lot of freedom.

[willpell]

Sounds like Incarnum.

No it doesn't; it sounds nothing like Incarnum. Incarnum has the exact same problem as pact magic - you have to familiarize yourself with your class's entire list at first level (barring high-level vestiges for the Binder and chakra binds for the Incarnate or Totemist). My whole point is to cut down on the options so that your character has certain core competencies that are all he has to remember.

[Answerer]

The entire point of both systems is to have broad options. Why even bother with them if you're gutting their entire purpose? Just play a Sorcerer or Warlock if that's what you want.

[JoshuaZ]

No it doesn't; it sounds nothing like Incarnum. Incarnum has the exact same problem as pact magic - you have to familiarize yourself with your class's entire list at first level (barring high-level vestiges for the Binder and chakra binds for the Incarnate or Totemist). My whole point is to cut down on the options so that your character has certain core competencies that are all he has to remember.

You don't have to do that. You can in fact pick a few soulmelds that seem nice or a few vestiges that seem nice and use those primarily.

[Amphetryon]

You don't have to do that. You can in fact pick a few soulmelds that seem nice or a few vestiges that seem nice and use those primarily.

Dingding. And the progression willpell described shared much more in common with Incarnum than with Vestiges, sans reflavoring.

[Psyren]

While knowing the best vestiges/soulmelds for a given level would indeed require reading all of them, skimming and taking an educated shot is much quicker and easier.

[willpell]

The entire point of both systems is to have broad options. Why even bother with them if you're gutting their entire purpose? Just play a Sorcerer or Warlock if that's what you want.

No, the entire point of Incarnum is to have powers that emanate from your very soul, and the entire point of Pact Magic is to have powers gained from bargaining with forbidden occult entities. I have issues with those concepts being mechanically executed in the form of a class that gives you broad options. It's somewhat fitting for Incarnum on the theory that you're tapping into a collective unconscious made of all souls everywhere ever, but this still feels wrong to me; making a sword out of YOUR soul ought to mean making a sword that looks unlike any other sword ever made, just as you are unlike every other person ever born. And for pact magic there's absolutely no reason to gain all the options at once; it's completely contrary to the concept of having to seek out hidden lore that others are trying to suppress. I see the ideal Binder class as playing a lot like an Archivist, only not for boring old Cure and Bless spells but for something really exotic. - you have a small core of relatively common powersets that most members of your class will have, but your chief activity is trying to track down a scroll with a "spell" that none of your colleagues have heard of, preferably one that nobody in a thousand years has heard of, and being the one who makes it your own.

[sreservoir]

No, the entire point of Incarnum is to have powers that emanate from your very soul, and the entire point of Pact Magic is to have powers gained from bargaining with forbidden occult entities. I have issues with those concepts being mechanically executed in the form of a class that gives you broad options. It's somewhat fitting for Incarnum on the theory that you're tapping into a collective unconscious made of all souls everywhere ever, but this still feels wrong to me; making a sword out of YOUR soul ought to mean making a sword that looks unlike any other sword ever made, just as you are unlike every other person ever born. And for pact magic there's absolutely no reason to gain all the options at once; it's completely contrary to the concept of having to seek out hidden lore that others are trying to suppress. I see the ideal Binder class as playing a lot like an Archivist, only not for boring old Cure and Bless spells but for something really exotic. - you have a small core of relatively common powersets that most members of your class will have, but your chief activity is trying to track down a scroll with a "spell" that none of your colleagues have heard of, preferably one that nobody in a thousand years has heard of, and being the one who makes it your own.

that's the fluff of pact magic and incarnum. fluff can be mutable (if one allows it to be -- and we'll just end that line of discussion right here) -- if you want different mechanics on that fluff, you stick the fluff on different mechanics and then work at the shearing.

the mechanics of pact magic and incarnum are based around broadness of options.

in short, we're talking at each other about different things.

(seriously, though, it's a lot easier to refluff things without breaking them than it is to homebrew balanced mechanics.)

[JoshuaZ]

No, the entire point of Incarnum is to have powers that emanate from your very soul, and the entire point of Pact Magic is to have powers gained from bargaining with forbidden occult entities. I have issues with those concepts being mechanically executed in the form of a class that gives you broad options. It's somewhat fitting for Incarnum on the theory that you're tapping into a collective unconscious made of all souls everywhere ever, but this still feels wrong to me; making a sword out of YOUR soul ought to mean making a sword that looks unlike any other sword ever made, just as you are unlike every other person ever born. And for pact magic there's absolutely no reason to gain all the options at once; it's completely contrary to the concept of having to seek out hidden lore that others are trying to suppress. I see the ideal Binder class as playing a lot like an Archivist, only not for boring old Cure and Bless spells but for something really exotic. - you have a small core of relatively common powersets that most members of your class will have, but your chief activity is trying to track down a scroll with a "spell" that none of your colleagues have heard of, preferably one that nobody in a thousand years has heard of, and being the one who makes it your own.

Sreservoir made some good points about this, in particular on issues of fluff v. mechanics. I'd like to also point out that you can easily adjust small aspects of the mechanics to fit the fluff closer to your liking. For example, for binders you can have them know the vestiges in Tome of Magic but require that other vestiges are sufficiently obscure that they need to learn about them through adventuring or the like. There are more than enough official vestiges out there outside ToM for this to work fine.

[Psyren]

No, the entire point of Incarnum is to have powers that emanate from your very soul, and the entire point of Pact Magic is to have powers gained from bargaining with forbidden occult entities. I have issues with those concepts being mechanically executed in the form of a class that gives you broad options. It's somewhat fitting for Incarnum on the theory that you're tapping into a collective unconscious made of all souls everywhere ever, but this still feels wrong to me; making a sword out of YOUR soul ought to mean making a sword that looks unlike any other sword ever made, just as you are unlike every other person ever born. And for pact magic there's absolutely no reason to gain all the options at once; it's completely contrary to the concept of having to seek out hidden lore that others are trying to suppress. I see the ideal Binder class as playing a lot like an Archivist, only not for boring old Cure and Bless spells but for something really exotic. - you have a small core of relatively common powersets that most members of your class will have, but your chief activity is trying to track down a scroll with a "spell" that none of your colleagues have heard of, preferably one that nobody in a thousand years has heard of, and being the one who makes it your own.

Regarding Pact Magic - the fluff of Binders doesn't support your interpretation at all. From Tome of Magic:


Others might misunderstand your powers, but you can't allow their shortcomings to stop you. You know that contacting the vestiges isn't an evil act, and you've never traded your soul for any sort of benefit. However, you can't afford to be too open about your activities, or those who fear your form of magic might learn something truly terrifying - your magic is easy.

You don't need to spend hours studying incomprehensible writings, beg for boons from a distant deity, or have magic in your blood. With the proper seal and the necessary personal power, you can call up a vestige and gain its abilities with just a few words. The situation does sometimes get more complicated, and you haven't figured it all out yet, but you're certain that your path to power lies with the vestiges -creatures so strong that even the gods can't contain them."

Binding is easy - and not only that, this ease is the driving force behind almost every religion (even the neutral and evil ones) hating Binders. It's not about pacting with barely understood amoral entities, it's about your magic being so easy that even the commoners can do it. (Which is even backed up by the crunch - any commoner can take the Bind Vestige feat, even if he isn't dedicated enough to start down the path totally.)

As for Incarnum, you are off there as well. Your own soul energy is represented primarily by essentia; that comes from within you, but the soulmelds themselves are primarily external.

[Answerer]

No, the entire point of Incarnum is to have powers that emanate from your very soul
That is not at all what Incarnum is. Incarnum does not rely on your soul, it relies on the "soulstuff" of all creatures past, present, and future. You shape that soulstuff into soulmelds, and gain power that way. Your soul only comes into play when you get the Soul Chakra, and even then it's merely binding other souls' soulstuff to your own soul.

[Psyren]

That is not at all what Incarnum is. Incarnum does not rely on your soul, it relies on the "soulstuff" of all creatures past, present, and future. You shape that soulstuff into soulmelds, and gain power that way. Your soul only comes into play when you get the Soul Chakra, and even then it's merely binding other souls' soulstuff to your own soul.

As I mentioned, your soul also comes into play regarding essentia - that represents your own soul's energy reserve.

But either way, the notion that all soulmelds should be highly individualized to the shaper is odd. If they were, identifying them visually would be very difficult if not impossible.

[Sutremaine]

Quartz is not a gem, just a crystal. Gems have to be somewhat valuable; garnet or topaz probably counts, but a fairly ordinary sparkly rock wouldn't.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/treasure.htm#tableGems

Quartz is worth 2d4x10gp per stone.

I have a chunk of malachite on my character sheet, plus ink and inkpen and chalk, plus copper coins and wooden dice, plus some flasks (for mixing enough liquid medium to write a seal with), plus a large sheet of canvas and some soap to clean it with. Total cost: 29gp.

[JoshuaZ]

But either way, the notion that all soulmelds should be highly individualized to the shaper is odd. If they were, identifying them visually would be very difficult if not impossible.

You could do something like this with little mechanical work. Just have it so that each person has their own personal twist on any soulmeld. The upshot should be that every soulmeld is as recognizable as most humans find faces. So if you've seen someone else use that soulmeld before, if they are in any form of disguise or the like, you'll know that it is the same person.

This would come up extremely rarely in practice but would back up the intended fluff.

[willpell]

Binding is easy - and not only that, this ease is the driving force behind almost every religion (even the neutral and evil ones) hating Binders.

I thought it had more to do with the fact that vestiges are beings which the gods kicked out of the universe; by interacting with someone who has been "excommunicated", you brand yourself anathema by willing to help someone that the Church doesn't want anyone helping.


it's about your magic being so easy that even the commoners can do it. (Which is even backed up by the crunch - any commoner can take the Bind Vestige feat, even if he isn't dedicated enough to start down the path totally.)

Any commoner could take Shape Soulmeld or Hidden Talent just as easily, so I'm not sure what your point is here.


But either way, the notion that all soulmelds should be highly individualized to the shaper is odd. If they were, identifying them visually would be very difficult if not impossible.

I don't like the uniformity of the soulmeld designs at all - in particular the idea that an Incarnate Weapon is always the same weapon for an entire alignment burns my toast. I much prefer to regard the printed fluff as a starting point for your own inspirations - my Evil Incarnate gets a scythe rather than a flail, because he's more interested in killing someone than tripping them. (To me the flail feels like it should be a Chaotic weapon more than an Evil one; ideally if you took Shape Soulmeld as a CE Soulborn or Antipaladin, that's what I'd imagine you getting.)

By the way, somebody mentioned a Soulborn fix?

[willpell]

(seriously, though, it's a lot easier to refluff things without breaking them than it is to homebrew balanced mechanics.)

I strongly disagree. Balancing the mechanics is difficult, but not ultimately that important; you can take your best guess, try it out, and if you end up one-hitting a Balor or dying to a Phrenic Squirrel then you can adjust on the fly until it seems right. What's important is having quality fluff, because even in this oversaturated age of media and self-awareness, where generic Tolkien/Lucas-style Hero's Journeys are a dime a dozen, a really amazing story (or piece of background for stories) is still priceless, unique, and irreplaceable. EVERY one of the vestiges has such a story (some are better than others, but all of them have their charms), as is the general concept behind pact magic, and Incarnum is not quite as good fluffwise but still an intruiging idea.

[Psyren]

I thought it had more to do with the fact that vestiges are beings which the gods kicked out of the universe; by interacting with someone who has been "excommunicated", you brand yourself anathema by willing to help someone that the Church doesn't want anyone helping.

But not all the Vestiges were "kicked out of reality" by deities. In fact, some of them had no interaction with gods at all (e.g. Arete, Haures), or were even gods themselves who simply overstepped a cosmic boundary somewhere along the way (e.g. Amon, The Triad.)

Religions don't want anyone helping the Vestiges because if the masses were to turn to Binding (something the Vestiges would greatly enjoy/encourage) then the worship of actual deities would suffer. This might even shift the balance of power - restoring some vestiges to existence, and dooming existing gods to become vestiges as interest in them waned (as happened with Amon.)




Any commoner could take Shape Soulmeld or Hidden Talent just as easily, so I'm not sure what your point is here.

Incorrect: a frail commoner (12 Con or less) cannot shape soulmelds. But s/he could still learn to bind, because there are no requirements and no innate talent required.

You don't "take" Hidden/Wild Talent any more than you "take" levels in sorcerer - those are just mechanical ways to represent something you're born with. Either you have the stuff or you don't.

By contrast, you aren't born with the ability to bind. And even if you suck at it (i.e. routinely fail binding checks) you still get all the power; you just end up being run roughshod by Influence, potentially creating havoc.


I don't like the uniformity of the soulmeld designs at all - in particular the idea that an Incarnate Weapon is always the same weapon for an entire alignment burns my toast.

It's based on Spiritual Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/spiritualWeapon.htm), IIRC. D&D defaults are the problem here, not Incarnum.



By the way, somebody mentioned a Soulborn fix?

Look up Person_Man's War Soul, an updated version of the Soulblade. I think Fax did one too, not sure.

[willpell]

But not all the Vestiges were "kicked out of reality" by deities. In fact, some of them had no interaction with gods at all (e.g. Arete, Haures), or were even gods themselves who simply overstepped a cosmic boundary somewhere along the way (e.g. Amon, The Triad.)

Is Haures in TOM? I don't remember him. Anyway at least two of these are from a web freebie and so their canonicity is disputable. Amon could be the exception that proves the rule.


Religions don't want anyone helping the Vestiges because if the masses were to turn to Binding (something the Vestiges would greatly enjoy/encourage) then the worship of actual deities would suffer.

I doubt that. Most of what clerics do is healing, and even if Buer provides comparable amounts of healing to a cleric of the same level, she doesn't come online until level 3 at best, and it's a fairly safe assumption that level 1-2 clerics are more common than level 3+ clerics in a typical gameworld. There might be some decline in clerical interest (and quite possibly a significant decrease in church powermongering based on clerical exclusivity), but it would hardly spell instant Gotterdamerung if binding were as publically accepted as any other form of power.


You don't "take" Hidden/Wild Talent any more than you "take" levels in sorcerer - those are just mechanical ways to represent something you're born with. Either you have the stuff or you don't.

Debatable. In my game you can indeed choose to become a sorcerer, much as you can choose to become an artist even if you're significantly lacking in talent. You might not be as good at it as someone else, but this is mostly just a function of Attributes; the dragon blood origin for sorcerer powers is far from certain, and anyway real-world genetics tells us that lineages tend to spread far and wide from a small number of roots. Just as something like a third of the people on Earth are descended from Genghis Khan, so something like two-thirds of the people in Greyhawk or Eberron could be descended from a handful of randypants dragons. The genes would probably tend toward dominance after all.


By contrast, you aren't born with the ability to bind. And even if you suck at it (i.e. routinely fail binding checks) you still get all the power; you just end up being run roughshod by Influence, potentially creating havoc.

That, I will admit, is a very interesting implication of binding which I haven't really explored.


It's based on Spiritual Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/spiritualWeapon.htm), IIRC. D&D defaults are the problem here, not Incarnum.

I noticed that (SW may be my single favorite spell of all time), but I see no reason why it can't be expanded upon. Incidentally while giving flails to Evil is interesting for IW, it's really a sucky thing to have originally done for SW, because flails can't trip anyone. You don't get the whole weapon, you just get its critical mods, and flails are completely ordinary in that regard, so it was basically a Bigby's Expressive Single Digit to the evil ideoclerics out there. I may change that as well (though not to scythe in this case, that'd be a little too good).


Look up Person_Man's War Soul, an updated version of the Soulblade. I think Fax did one too, not sure.

By Soulblade you mean Soulborn? And I think Fax was the one who said "Gestalt it with Soulknife and call it a day", though I may be misremembering.

[Essence_of_War]

By Soulblade you mean Soulborn? And I think Fax was the one who said "Gestalt it with Soulknife and call it a day", though I may be misremembering.


Gestalting w/ Soulknife helps both a lot and is a good start, but it doesn't quite resolve the problem of how horrific the soulborn is at meldshaping.

I think you'll find Person_Man's Soulborn fix (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=119121) to be more thoughtful fix for the Soulborn's , meldshaping problems, and his War Soul (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=156441) is really what both classes SHOULD have been, and takes the concepts safely into the tier 3 area from the dregs of tier 5.

[Psyren]

Is Haures in TOM? I don't remember him. Anyway at least two of these are from a web freebie and so their canonicity is disputable. Amon could be the exception that proves the rule.

Haures and Amon are both in ToM, so no. Zagan is another that was not exiled by any deities.

Also, when your argument starts to rely on "these vestiges aren't really vestiges" that is a sign to begin calling your assumptions into question.


I doubt that. Most of what clerics do is healing, and even if Buer provides comparable amounts of healing to a cleric of the same level, she doesn't come online until level 3 at best, and it's a fairly safe assumption that level 1-2 clerics are more common than level 3+ clerics in a typical gameworld. There might be some decline in clerical interest (and quite possibly a significant decrease in church powermongering based on clerical exclusivity), but it would hardly spell instant Gotterdamerung if binding were as publically accepted as any other form of power.

I'm starting to be unsure you've really read through the Binding chapter in the detail that you should have :smallconfused:

First you didn't realize Haures was in the book - and now you're questioning fluff that was openly stated in the chapter. Quotes:

"Those who practice pact magic expound upon its ease. A binder need never beg on his knees for power or study moldy tomes for hours on end to grasp the secrets of a few simple spells. Once he learns the basics of pact magic, he can call up a vestige at any time and take its power for his own. Vestiges never refuse pacts, and they ask little in return for the power they grant."

Most people have an indifferent attitude toward binders because they know very little about what such individuals do.
- snip -
The situation changes radically when religion comes into the equation, however. The leaders or most organized religions are aware of binders to at least some degree. Most choose to keep that knowledge secret, lest the common clergy and worshipers learn of powers beyond the reach of their deities.

They openly state that the chief worry of organized religions in D&D is the laity discovering the ease and power of vestiges - an ease shared by no other form of magic, not even Incarnum.


Debatable. In my game you can indeed choose to become a sorcerer,

Arguments that begin with "In my game" cease to be a discussion of default fluff and therefore are not relevant. The default fluff of sorcerers (and wilders) is that they are born, not made.

[willpell]

@ Essence of War: Thanks! I don't entirely agree with his changes, being the low-op fellow I am, but it's definitely food for thought when I decide I'm up to making a milder fix (probably aiming for tier 4 or even high tier 5 in order to minimize the changes; I don't think it takes very much to make the class good enough to be worth playing if you're determined to play it, and am not especially interested in making it an appealing option for reasons other than wanting to play an individual of the sort; all I want is to make it slightly less of a slap in the face to those who are willing to take that slap if necessary in order to play the character they want).

I guess what I want from Pact Magic is to see vestiges treated more like magic items (albeit intelligent and nonphysical ones). You shouldn't have to take a feat or a level to use them (though certainly taking a feat or a level makes you better at it), nor should you be able to have them if you've never gone out and acquired them. You're progressing along in any other class just as you always thought you would, then one day you stop into the local library, happen upon a dusty old book that describes a process, you try it out on a lark and it works. Bam - you're a Binder, with one vestige, having spent zero game resources making it happen. And you probably don't have to repeat your pact every day; novice that you were, you probably promised a lot more than you had to, and now the vestige has its hooks in you for a good long time.

[JoshuaZ]

In fairness to Willpell, part of what that fluff implies especially the bit about power beyond the deities is the simple idea that there are realms to which the deities power does not extend. This is also backed up by other remarks in the chapter like the gnomish attitude towards binding.

[Kaje]

I guess what I want from Pact Magic is to see vestiges treated more like magic items (albeit intelligent and nonphysical ones). You shouldn't have to take a feat or a level to use them (though certainly taking a feat or a level makes you better at it), nor should you be able to have them if you've never gone out and acquired them. You're progressing along in any other class just as you always thought you would, then one day you stop into the local library, happen upon a dusty old book that describes a process, you try it out on a lark and it works. Bam - you're a Binder, with one vestige, having spent zero game resources making it happen. And you probably don't have to repeat your pact every day; novice that you were, you probably promised a lot more than you had to, and now the vestige has its hooks in you for a good long time.
Sounds like what you want is more akin to rituals (Ritual of Shadow-Walking, Ritual of Alignment, etc).

[willpell]

Sounds like what you want is more akin to rituals (Ritual of Shadow-Walking, Ritual of Alignment, etc).

Where are these described?

[Psyren]

In fairness to Willpell, part of what that fluff implies especially the bit about power beyond the deities is the simple idea that there are realms to which the deities power does not extend.

Oh, I'm not disputing that at all. But the belief that every vestige is created due to direct deific action is simply not true. Many were divine punishments (Andromalius, Leraje, Savnok etc.), yes - but plent of others were failed attempts to achieve divinity (Acererak, Zagan, Tenebrous), not-quite-murder (Agares, Geryon, Shax), accidents etc.

Paimon, Malphas and Ronove's origins have nothing to do with gods either.

And it's difficult to imagine that chaotic or evil faiths would have much of a problem with binding if the aversion were merely due to contracting with questionable entities. After all, their own gods are no different in this regard. So the common thread we are left with is the one continually stated throughout the chapter - that Binding is easier than divine magic, and therefore alluring to the otherwise unlearned/untalented/impious.

[Suddo]

Many were divine punishments (Andromalius, Leraje, Savnok etc.)...

Wasn't Andromalius sent to limbo (I forget what they actually call it) due to his god being pleased with him. Did he just change alignment before he died to pull a prank on his favorite god and the god sent him to limbo because he couldn't see him be with any other god. I don't see that as punishment myself.

This assumes I'm identifying the right guy I'm away from my books at the moment.

[Answerer]

Andromalius's situation was not exactly punishment, no. Sort of awkward really.

[Psyren]

It was "direct action of a deity" so I lumped it in with Leraje. But regardless of how it falls my point stands - Paimon, Arete, Haures and Ronove were all non-divine examples.

[willpell]

Whew, only 4 weeks....

So the vestige Tenebrous lets you use the Shadow Magic ability Flicker several times a day, but it doesn't specify what caster level you use it at. Would you use your binder level? It's not going to be a very useful ability otherwise. I'd assume the default caster level for mysteries is 1, since you don't have any shadowcaster levels to make it more, and so it doesn't technically work at all becuase you need 2 caster levels to teleport 5 feet (a generous DM might allow you to teleport 2.5 feet with 1 caster level, but the text as-written means only even levels matter).

Also Flicker seems to be one of the more confusingly-written Mysteries; as written, casting it doesn't actually do anything other than grant a miss chance to an attack being used against you (and I don't think you actually can cast it in response to an attack; whether it's spell-like or supernatural, either way turning it on should be a standard action). Once cast, you have the ability to teleport as an immediate action, once per round for a number of rounds equal to your caster level, and logically doing that should be what grants you a miss chance on attacks; you teleport away and they have a half-chance to tag you before you're completely gone.

[eggs]

On caster level, any spell or mystery that a granted ability apes is cast at CL = Binder level.

The word "cast" is probably a mistake; substitute any other word for "activate" and its effects make sense and are very clear.

[Sutremaine]

Bam - you're a Binder, with one vestige, having spent zero game resources making it happen. And you probably don't have to repeat your pact every day; novice that you were, you probably promised a lot more than you had to, and now the vestige has its hooks in you for a good long time.
How many resources do you think a character should be putting into their feats (or classes, if you do that), either on a meta level (ie. roleplaying) or an in-game level (eg. time when time is short, gold or items)?

Not renewing the pact every day means either a houserule is in play or the Binder has taken the first level of Tenebrous Apostate.


Amon could be the exception that proves the rule.
Yes, Amon could be exception that tests the rule. :smalltongue:

[willpell]

How many resources do you think a character should be putting into their feats (or classes, if you do that), either on a meta level (ie. roleplaying) or an in-game level (eg. time when time is short, gold or items)?

It depends on what they are. It makes sense to me that a wizard has to learn his spells, and it makes sense to me that a cleric can know any spell that her god grants her (though I kind of think that shouldn't be the entire spell list, I've thought about having deity-specific lists of spells or something, and I love the Favored Soul for being exactly a limited Cleric whose choices can be partly based on the flavor of her personality or the deity's). The Archivist is another character who has the same flavor as the Wizard in this regard, and I somewhat feel that the Binder seems like it ought to be similar to the Wizard and Archivist in this regard. I have come to feel this a bit less strongly than I did before, as there are some ways in which the existing fluff works for me, but I still feel like it could be flavored a bit better, and might do the adjustments myself if not for the fact that it would require work.

[Sutremaine]

I guess finding the information on the first seal could be made into a miniquest, so long as it doesn't take attention away from the other players for too long. But once you learn how to make a pact, the rest should come easily, I think.

[Psyren]

So the vestige Tenebrous lets you use the Shadow Magic ability Flicker several times a day, but it doesn't specify what caster level you use it at. Would you use your binder level? It's not going to be a very useful ability otherwise. I'd assume the default caster level for mysteries is 1, since you don't have any shadowcaster levels to make it more, and so it doesn't technically work at all becuase you need 2 caster levels to teleport 5 feet (a generous DM might allow you to teleport 2.5 feet with 1 caster level, but the text as-written means only even levels matter).

This is explicitly spelled out in the book:


If a supernatural ability granted by a vestige mimics the effect of a spell or shadow magic mystery, the caster level of that ability is always equal to a binder's effective binder level.

The psionic vestiges article extends this to psionic powers as well.



Also Flicker seems to be one of the more confusingly-written Mysteries; as written, casting it doesn't actually do anything other than grant a miss chance to an attack being used against you (and I don't think you actually can cast it in response to an attack; whether it's spell-like or supernatural, either way turning it on should be a standard action).

Flicker works one of two ways:

1) Standard action to activate, then you can immediate-action teleport any time during its duration.
2) Immediate action to activate+teleport, then you can continue to immediately teleport during its duration.

I personally favor the second interpretation, since otherwise the line "if you cast Flicker in response to an attack..." doesn't make sense. But even if your DM rules that #1 is how it works, you still get the ability to blink out of the way of attacks as intended, it's just that the first way you do need to "pre-buff" the first round.

[willpell]

This is explicitly spelled out in the book:

Ah, thanks. That's what I couldn't find.


I personally favor the second interpretation, since otherwise the line "if you cast Flicker in response to an attack..." doesn't make sense. But even if your DM rules that #1 is how it works, you still get the ability to blink out of the way of attacks as intended, it's just that the first way you do need to "pre-buff" the first round.

Hm....I had been thinking that the "cast" part was a mistake and that the miss chance applied whenever you teleport, but reading it as an immediate teleport, and after that they all become predictable enough to not have a miss chance, probably makes more sense. It's definitely more powerful if it gives the miss chance multiple times.

Remind me, if you teleport as an immediate action before your turn, can you then do it again during your turn, using the next round's immediate action?

[Yuki Akuma]

Only if you didn't use your last turn's swift action.

[Answerer]

Only if you didn't use your last turn's swift action.
Incorrect.

Immediate Actions never look "backward." If it is your turn, you can use this turn's Swift Action as an Immediate. If it is not your turn, you are always using the next turn's Immediate Action.

[GenghisDon]

Thanks for all the binder info & experiences, guys...I've had the TOM for years now, but never used them, in part because I've been playing mostly 1e & B/X instead. They always seemed the most interesting & play worthy of the 3 magic types TOM introduced.

My players, while not always loving it (changing systems that is), are vets of many game systems, and a couple like the D20 game best, so I'm due to come back to it.

I'd kinda like to see what a binder heavy group can do, perhaps a pair of binders & a couple other classes with bind vestige+ feat(s). A little "cabal" as it were. No need for twinking them out, perhaps no prestige classes at all for the game, but I'm much better at tweaks than any of them by far anyway, so building a munchkin never avails them anything, save for the ire of fellow players that find the going got much tougher for them. Still, the class looks brimming with potential, and I can't see how bind vestige feat et all can go wrong really.

I'll see how they do at mid levels (hopefully) onwards...compared to the experiences posted here.

Anyone else have actual play experiences with binders & vestige related feats, monsters & items to relate?