My Opinion on where Magic of Incarnum went wrong

[ngilop]

So I just recently got the Magic of Incarnum book.

I like what I read but at the same time the book really ticked me off.

I hate how WoTC comes out with books like this and then say 'these 3 classes are the only classes that cna use the stuff in this book'

Why is it that only the soulborn ( or as i see it, a better paladin AGAIN), incarnate, and totemist the only classes in the world that can use soulbinds?

I think WoTC could have had a HUGE success If they had done one simple little thing with Magic of Incarnum.

All they had to do was implement this one little thing.

Every race/class should have been able to use soulmelds. sort of as a semi-replacement for magical items.

Id make this maybe feat based and make it tied to constitution, and also toss in some spells that cna be used as 'soulmelds' like free movement, death ward, or haste as some examples.

TO me seperating the soulmelds from specific classes and allowing everybody to use this stuff is a much better way to implement this than just regulating it to certian classes and certain races.

To me they took a wonderful and awesome idea and then shackled it to a very specific place.

now just a cursory glance tells me that "DANG!" this is gonna be a LOT of work to get this sweet idea from the book to what I think this should be.

anyways tell me what you guys think?

[WhatBigTeeth]

Are you aware of shape soulmeld or the incarnum spells?

Because when I read the OP, my first thought was "That's exactly what they did."

[AuraTwilight]

Yea uh...did you read the book all the way through? They literally did that.

It's just those three classes are ENTIRELY CENTERED AROUND IT.

By the way Soulborn is not a better Paladin; it's equal and/or worse.

[Nettlekid]

As stated above, they did spread it out. There are spells that let you shape soulmelds and open chakras. There are feats that do the same. Now, in Tome of Magic, the classes presented there are pretty much the only ones that can use the cool stuff in the book, either well or at all. Sure, there are a couple of Bind Vestige feats, but they're severely limited compared to a single level of Binder. I'm not sure if there are any feats that allow the use of Mysteries or Utterances. Probably are, but again limited. But Magic of Incarnum works very much like the Tome of Battle. There are three classes that can use all of the stuff in here to its fullest extent, but there are feats that ANY class can take and have quite a wide array of options to choose from.

[Just to Browse]

Soulmelds are accessible by both feats and spells.

And as Aura said, the soulborn is worse than the paladin. So much worse.

[ngilop]

I know you cna take soem soulemdls just like hwo TOB allowed other classes to take stances/manuevers


I do notthink you guys get what I was trying to say.

I mean take out all the MoI classes altogher and allow every class/race in the whole game.

[Just to Browse]

So you mean write an MoI ACF for every class and race in the game?

Why?

[AuraTwilight]

Uh...THEY CAN. Every race and every class is capable of taking feats or spells that let them use soulmelds. What the hell are you going on about, if that doesn't satisfy you?

[TaiLiu]

Why?
Also, it would be difficult. MoI was published in 2005; they would have to add this ACF to every single new class they published.

[Nettlekid]

What, like give every class a Soulmeld/Essentia Capacity progression? Well they could, but that would be useless bookkeeping to anyone who didn't plan to use it, and be way too heavily weighted toward Meldshaping in general. It's kind of neat as a gimmick, but it's not cool enough to be a main feature, like saves and BAB. You might as well give every class a spell list. Which would be weird. Now, if you wanted to introduce a sort of ToB-style "all non-meldshaper levels count as half-meldshaper for purposes of essentia capacity" or something like that, that might be neat. But that's not what you're saying, is it?

[Agent 451]

Haven't looked at MoI for quite some time, but could you not just use the meldshaping progressions from each of those classes an apply them as is to classes that have the same base attack progression? Slow (+10/+5) progression get the Incarnate meldshaping (can't remember if it has the lowest or the highest meldshaping progression) medium base attack get medium meldshaping, and so on. It's going to need tweaking, but it's a quick and easy start if you want all classes to have access to Incarnum, especially if you play or run a low op group.

[Ravens_cry]

You could add it if you wished. Doesn't sound like it would be too hard to homebrew. You might get really sick of the colour blue after a while.

[ngilop]

well nettlekid kind of got what i meant.

There I know that would be a lot of bookeeping, but then again peopel seem to love being the big boys on the block and those classes are all about bookeeping.

I juist dislike the fact that those three classes are the ony classes that cna do the soulmeld stuff to the fullest.

much like my biggest gripe about ToB is 'well if a fighter is all about fighitng why the hell is he only half decent and cool fighing tricks?" and the same holds true here.

I know that they have feats, spells and other such that allows people to use the melds. I just thought that taking out those classes and making it so every class can use each meld to its fullest would have been a much better thing.

I just hate the fatc that WoTC come sup with these great idea and screw it up by saying only X can do Y, but can kinda do 1/2Y...


I get that I am not able at times to get my idea sthrough but i am overhelmed at the number of people who justs ay " the booka llows you do that idiot!!RAWRARWARRW!@)_E#*^#*&(' lik dman,, did you guys even read what I was getting it. i would have htough that what I was inferring was at least semi-obvious.

I see that it has completely fail to become appearant to aura, but I am not syaing some BS liek give everybody and theri cousins ACF for meldshaping or whatever everydy is is raging about here.

I am sayin to completey divorce the fact that only certain classes get teh full monty so to speak and just make meldshaping something people get via feats ( but they get teh whole thing not that limited BS they get now)

do you understand what I am saying now?

[Nettlekid]

Er...to be fair, I think you might get your point across better if you tried proofreading your posts and keeping them clean of spelling/grammatical errors. Many of your words are spilling into each other, making it difficult to understand what you're saying.

Apart from that, I think most people are going to disagree with you that Soulmelds should be a universal feature for every class for a few reasons. One is that NO class has a universal feature. As far as I'm aware, there's nothing that every single class has. If you gave every class Soulmelds, it would make those Soulmelds incredibly boring. It would be like giving every class Rage, or a Sneak Attack progression. Imagine how boring any build designed around Rage or Sneak Attack would be if anyone could do it? And secondly, Soulmelds just aren't that good. They're okay flavor-wise, though sometimes the whole "soul energy" thing feels a little forced to me. But mechanically they're a kind of weak. A lot of classes aren't going to even want them. So people would get annoyed with them if they were universal to every class.

[eggynack]

So... you're disappointed that classes that weren't designed to do something, aren't nearly as good at it as classes that are? Why does that make any sense? Should all fighters get easily accessible psionic abilities? It's really not a logical objection to incarnum. Incarnum classes are good at incarnum, and classes that aren't incarnum can settle for only having access to the feat version.

Also, your syntax could use a lot of work. It's genuinely difficult to understand what you're saying sometimes, which might be part of the reason lots of people don't understand you.

[Mr Beer]

I get that I am not able at times to get my idea sthrough but i am overhelmed at the number of people who justs ay " the booka llows you do that idiot!!RAWRARWARRW!@)_E#*^#*&(' lik dman,, did you guys even read what I was getting it. i would have htough that what I was inferring was at least semi-obvious.

It's easier to successfully convey concepts when you take the time to write clearly and coherently. Your posts are messy and annoying to read because you don't bother to spell or use punctuation correctly and that lack of care is also reflected in how poorly you explained what you were are asking in your initial post.

That's all fine, but it's irksome when you decide to berate people over a problem that you caused. That goes double when you are asking people for help and they took time out of their day to do it.

[Augmental]

much like my biggest gripe about ToB is 'well if a fighter is all about fighitng why the hell is he only half decent and cool fighing tricks?" and the same holds true here.

Because the fighter was poorly designed, basically.

[ngilop]

every class gets feats, base attack bonus, and saves bonuses.

but besdies that I just lookd at it and said " wow that a kickarse idea, why did they not make it so this is just a selection of siper cool feats?)
I just started to imagne a ranger who takes on aspects of an animal or a barbarian that does the same, I know that each class can get some melds via a feat but they only get a part, not all

its also my argument with TOB, and i do not care what anybody else says about ToB and people telling me that i'm "disappointed that classes that weren't designed to do something, aren't nearly as good at it as classes that are?" Look at the fluff of the Warblade, now take a look at the fighter. I have not seen a difference. and how can anybody justifyably tell me, that every ToB class should be better than the base classes. when really all the Warblade is, is the fighter fixed. The class that has fight in the name is somehow as terrible as the wizard even though I would just assume that the guy that is supposed to have the best all around fighting capabilities would I do not know.. have the best fighting capabilities. instead this new guy called the warblade is. and to add insult to injury for the poor fighter, he only counts as half as good as fighting in regards to the new fighting styles

I would wish for you all to read this (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19573526/Analyzing_the_Fighter_vs_The_Warblade) ist a wonderful essay on this whole warblade vs fighter cornundrum.

I I think that my first post was pretty good, and my 2nd post was indeed pretty bad, my 3rd is allright. and hopefully this one is decent. my ability to type is indeed affected by my emotions at the time, whne i have to find myself defending .. myself? i type a little too fasta nd end up making a lot of mistakes. I have never really figured out why i get so upset and being unstuled over random interent mediums but dang sometimes I do.

[Flickerdart]

Why are the Swordsage, Warblade, and Crusader the only initiators? Why do only Warlocks and Dragonfire Adepts use invocations? Why do only Marshals and Divine Minds have scaling auras? Because they are different classes. Incarnum is no more a replacement for items than magic is, or martial maneuvers are, or vestige binds, or Ardent mantle powers, or Fighter bonus feats.

[Just to Browse]

If every class is going to use soulmelds to their fullest, then those classes are being rewritten into MoI classes. Sort of like how fighters and wizards don't get 9th-level maneuvers, non-incarnates don't get soul soulmelds.

So your argument either boils down to:
a) The best class features from these classes should be given to my favorite classes cause I want it, or
b) There should be an ACF for all classes that turns them into Incarnum users.

(a) makes no sense, and (b) would only be a good idea if Incarnum got any support--Psionics got a lot of support from players, so it was rewritten in several editions and got three books in 3.x. Incarnum was complicated, obsessed with the color blue, and didn't get a place in the SRD, so it had a smaller fanbase. Why bother writing 13 MoI classes when you can just do three like every other splat?

[ngilop]

If every class is going to use soulmelds to their fullest, then those classes are being rewritten into MoI classes. Sort of like how fighters and wizards don't get 9th-level maneuvers, non-incarnates don't get soul soulmelds.

So your argument either boils down to:
a) The best class features from these classes should be given to my favorite classes cause I want it, or
b) There should be an ACF for all classes that turns them into Incarnum users.

(a) makes no sense, and (b) would only be a good idea if Incarnum got any support--Psionics got a lot of support from players, so it was rewritten in several editions and got three books in 3.x. Incarnum was complicated, obsessed with the color blue, and didn't get a place in the SRD, so it had a smaller fanbase. Why bother writing 13 MoI classes when you can just do three like every other splat?

1) I have no argument

2) the title itself says MY OPINION on where Magic of Incarnum went worng.

I love how you guys just jump on me and proceed oo say that my opinion is completely wrong.

and flicker, I can see invocations being regulated to just those classes, but really you are going to tell me that martial manuevers are something completly differnt than certain fighting styles and a what not ?

[Nettlekid]

Well, you did ask what we thought about your opinion, and it seems that the majority of the people here think your opinion is wrong. So they said so. So you really can't blame them for saying so, since you asked.

[Flickerdart]

and flicker, I can see invocations being regulated to just those classes, but really you are going to tell me that martial manuevers are something completly differnt than certain fighting styles and a what not ?
Maneuvers are fighting styles.

[Gharkash]

Let us be enlightened by the wisdom of urban dictionary:

2. opinion
immunity to being told your wrong

[TuggyNE]

I just started to imagne a ranger who takes on aspects of an animal or a barbarian that does the same

That sounds like a good idea, but what about it is unique to Incarnum? Couldn't a Ranger imitate badgers and go into a rage? Couldn't a Fighter make use of inspiring words or shouted instructions? Couldn't a Rogue learn how to cast spells without using scrolls or wands?

The answer is yes in all cases. How, you may ask? With the great advance of 3.x: multiclassing.

[Flickerdart]

The answer is yes in all cases. How, you may ask? With the great advance of 3.x: multiclassing.
Or PrCs, of which Incarnum has plenty (which I suppose is really just multiclassing with a funny name when you get down to it).

[Ravens_cry]

Or PrCs, of which Incarnum has plenty (which I suppose is really just multiclassing with a funny name when you get down to it).
It's a form of multiclassing, yes, though the goals of a prestige class tend to be a bit different from a base class.

[Fizban]

Dang, I was hoping for a discussion of how incarnum is a pain to make useful in combat and has no endgame power. As someone who's read the min-max guides and then worked a few reasonable builds, I can definitely say that the biggest problem is being frontloaded. Low level incarnum is actually pretty broken, but high level incarnum is basically useless without something crazy (I should leave out totemists though, since they're natural weapon piles and as such are pretty much always viable). Sure you can stack enough buffing melds on a LE Incarnate to almost match a normal melee guy, but you're not even "using" incarnum then, just buffing a 1/2 BAB char into a figher. Having access to every single soulmeld at level one is a massive overhead in terms of learning the capabilities of the system, while simultaneously making it difficult to add anything good enough for endgame since it's automatically available at level 1. The chakra binds are in weird clumps at uneven intervals, making them hard to compare to standard metrics of power (read: spells invocations).

Regarding cross class support, well actually Incarnum is just about the best thing to multiclass with. Seriously, as I was building my builds, I kept finding that I'd be better off getting out the incarnum class after a few levels because I just didn't need it anymore. It's practically impossible to make good use of the Shape Soulmeld feat since you have to pay out the nose in feats to get the essentia, but a 1-4 level dip gives you enough to do anything you want except the high tier binds, most of which suck and aren't worth the trouble unless they're your only class feature because you stayed in straight incarnum.

[Just to Browse]

Let us be enlightened by the wisdom of urban dictionary:

2. opinion
immunity to being told your wrong

I had to actually look this up (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=opinion). That's fantastic, and also expresses exactly what I was thinking--if I think your opinion is wrong, I will say so, you are not immune to being wrong just because you're not using facts.

[Gharkash]

Yeah, posting your opinion online and expecting every answer/post/comment to be praising your point of view is a bit optimistic, to say the least. That simple sentence was pretty accurate for this situation.

[Flickerdart]

It's a form of multiclassing, yes, though the goals of a prestige class tend to be a bit different from a base class.
Right; all I'm saying is that if you want to stick some blue on your psion or barbarian or whatever, there are PrCs in the book specifically made for that, so it's not like WotC only wanted three guys to have Incarnum ever.

[Psyren]

I think the OP is saying that, while he knows other classes can access soulmelds and chakras via feats, that he wanted such access to be easier for those classes to get. In other words, feats are valuable, so spending them on soulmelds can be tough for most characters to justify, even dedicated meldshapers.

My personal take on this - I agree, but it's generally easy to get around this problem by multiclassing and PrCing. Since a single level in either of the two main meldshaping classes (Totemist or Incarnate) grants you all of their soulmelds at once, you can go for a quick dip before either returning to your main class or even pursuing an incarnum theurge of some kind, like Soulcaster, Soul Manifester or Sapphire Hierarch. Since Meldshaper level barely matters for most things, you don't even need to do that, but it can help.

Personally though, I think a better way to gain access to soulmelds is to make incarnum feats valid choices for Vow of Poverty. The synergy here is great - you get a boatload of useful options for a VoP character (most of which are better than any exalted feat), the flavor and mechanics go well together, and VoP not only remains useful for the few classes that could benefit from it before, it gets opened up to many new ones as well. Best of all, VoP doesn't require a lot of feat or level investments from most builds, and granting free Incarnum feats would more than repay the two feats burned on entry.

[Gildedragon]

Personally though, I think a better way to gain access to soulmelds is to make incarnum feats valid choices for Vow of Poverty. The synergy here is great - you get a boatload of useful options for a VoP character (most of which are better than any exalted feat), the flavor and mechanics go well together, and VoP not only remains useful for the few classes that could benefit from it before, it gets opened up to many new ones as well. Best of all, VoP doesn't require a lot of feat or level investments from most builds, and granting free Incarnum feats would more than repay the two feats burned on entry.

So cribbing that idea into my houserules. It's pretty good and efficient.

[Vknight]

Soulmelds are accessible by both feats and spells.

And as Aura said, the soulborn is worse than the paladin. So much worse.

I can point out its good for certain builds

Outside of that I agree with Psyren that is what I got as well

[Salbazier]

Let us be enlightened by the wisdom of urban dictionary:

2. opinion
immunity to being told your wrong

Post like this that made me wish we have rep/like system. :smallbiggrin: Well, there's another way to appreciate such genious. Permission to sig, sir?

[Gharkash]

Of course. You are the first asking to sig me, i am flattered.

[ShneekeyTheLost]

Quite frankly, the entire argument is... well... silly.

First off, the cap on essentia investment is character level dependent, not class level dependent, so they're actually quite multi-class friendly. Which only makes the Prc's even more interesting because, unlike casting PrC's, you don't nerf yourself by making a 'hybrid' and in many cases, they synergize VERY well.

Second off, Incarnum have some of the best dips out there. Totemist2 goes well with anything except a pure caster build, for example. A dip nets you access to all the soulmelds on that list. All of them. Now, actually binding them can be a bit trickier, but many of the soulmelds do just fine simply shaped.

Therefore any character CAN get access to Soulmelds fairly trivially, should they actually want any.

[Regitnui]

Personally, I wrote off the whole book after seeing the two 'races' of the Skarns and Rilkans, or as I like to call them, "Look At Me I'm Special" Chaotic and Lawful versions.

[Waker]

I had to show up eventually when there is a thread about Incarnum.
Why do you feel the need for every class to have built-in meldshaping ability? As someone else pointed out, that would be the same as granting Fighters spellcasting or Barbarians the use of Psionics. If everybody has access to Incarnum it becomes boring. Not every character was meant to live in a blue world, in a blue house with a blue little window and a blue corvette.

[Spuddles]

I was under the impression that incarnum was one of the most multiclass friendly systems out there and that it was specifically designed with dabbling in mind- that's why there's a gazillion feats for multiclass characters and like 3 incarnotheruge prestige classes.

[vartan]

It's practically impossible to make good use of the Shape Soulmeld feat since you have to pay out the nose in feats to get essentia

What about shape soulmeld (wyrmtail belt)? Is one feat worth 2 AC?

[Flickerdart]

What about shape soulmeld (wyrmtail belt)? Is one feat worth 2 AC?
In general, a small, flat, numerical bonus to something you can buy with cash is not a good use of a feat.

[Joe the Rat]

Given the glut of base classes and prestige classes in 3.5, adding classes that have a specialized little variant of something isn't out of place. You have to remember that "class" doesn't so much mean "career" or "party role" or "what you have been trained to be" so much as "a profile of specific skills and abilities."

I suppose if you want everyone to be able to get it, easily, add the three MoI base classes to everybody's favored class list, or treat them as no-requirement prestige classes that just happen to go all the way to 20. If you want everyone to have it to start with, use the above, and have all the characters take a level in one of the three - and start everyone at level 2.

[Bonzai]

In my opinion, where MotI went wrong, was the beginning of development on 4th edition. It was billed as a brand new system like psionics. However it never got the support that psionics did. I remember hearing about 4th edition coming out, and getting ticked off that I wouldn't get to see a "Complete Incarnum" book. It's a good system, and it's a shame that it wasn't developed further.

[Deepbluediver]

It sounds like what the OP meant about MoI was less about it being wrong, and more about it not going far enough (in his opinion).

I think that feats are actually a really good way to get classes alternate features, and that being feat-starved isn't really a MoI-related issue. If you want MoI more readily available to other classes, it would be easy enough, I think, to homebrew a boost to a few feats so they contain automatic progression, so you don't need to forgo everything you normally take to get an essentia-using Fighter or Monk.


IMO, where MoI went wrong was twofold- first the layout of the book is terrible. Because of WotC's strict adherence to formula, they insist on giving the races and the classes first before any explanation of what incarnum/essentia is and what it does (mechanically). Which makes attempting to read the book cover-to-cover an exercise in frustration. Once you've figured it out it's reasonably straightforward, but (IMO, again) this book could have used a little more editing and a more concise summary, especially since Incarnum has a fair amount of very specific terminology.

The secondly issue was the MoI classes themselves. In fact, the issue persisted almost all through 3.5 that WotC tended to overvalue melee stats and alternative-magic systems, as if they had some crippling fear that a class would end up more powerful than their precious Wizard/Cleric/Druid. They liked to treat "Spellcasting" as a single class feature on the same scale as "Rage" or "Feats" or "Full Incarnum progression" despite it being at least an order of magnitude more versatile (there are over 100 pages of spells in the PHB alone, taking up more than 1/3 of the total pagecount).

That's how you ended up with caster-chassis on a Melee class (Incarnate) and half-incarnum progression on a class with almost nothing else (Soulborn). The totemist probably has the most interesting flavor, but aside from it's Soulmelds being "animal themed" that was about all it got.


That's my 2 cp on the issue.