Middle Finger of Vecna Binder

[Garresh]

Just was looking at the pdf of the mage hand binder from their patreon. I downloaded it like a year ago but unsubbed and forgot about it(took a break from D&D and had money issues) Looking it over, their new binder has some mechanics I see as kind of nuts. Has their content been power creeping or am I overreacting?

The main offender imho is some of their vestiges skill bonuses. For example, a lot of them let you choose to replace a skill check for a particular skill. Basically after you roll, you can treat the result as 10 OR your binder level plus your charisma modifier(whichever is higher). That seems absolutely nuts to me.

I haven't seen anything else too crazy, but how is their new content? I really like their work and wanna sub to their patreon again, but I'm wondering if people's perspectives on their content has changed in the last year or two.

[Dork_Forge]

Not familiar with their work, but that ability seems OTT, what level does it come online at? I assume Binder is a class unto itself?

[Garresh]

It's specific to the vestige. Basically it's like spells you prep for a day, but it gives abilities and skill bonuses. But the slots are way limited. Like you only get to pick one per day until level 5. That one only works for stealth but is available at level ONE. I can't post their pdf because it's paid content, but their free version they worked on honestly seems way better balanced.

Like there's another one that lets you use a reaction to gain 5 temporary hit points when hit by a melee attack. They only last til end of your next turn but there's no cooldown and it's available from level 1. Seems almost as good as heavy armor master tbh.

Anyways Binder is a full class based off the 3.5e class. Tons of ports have been made, but the free one they made was considered the best for years. Just wondering where their reputation sits now since they started producing paid content.

[Anonymouswizard]

Honestly, I'm not familiar with their Binder, but I did like their Witch. Asked to play a White Witch as a village healer but that game never got off the ground.

Honestly this ability seems more problematic at higher levels than lower ones. But just to check, do you replace the result or the roll? The former is probably fine until about tier 3, the latter until tier 2.

[jaappleton]

I've brought this topic to the attention of DracoKnight, who has quite a bit of knowledge regarding the working of MFoV.

Hoping he might be able to provide an answer with some insight for you.

[Garresh]

Thanks man. I'm not trying to badmouth them or anything. In my experience they're some of the best 3rd party/homebrew authors out there. I just worry because I might play one and I'm kinda on the fence about using the free version or the newer one. Some of the features worry me. Another one is the archer who gets NINE aoe attacks per long rest. Basically their arrows explode in a 5 ft radius for half damage. Kinda feels like a better ranger(Not that that's hard to do lol).

Edit: I've played their old version extensively and it's VERY balanced. Never felt useless. Never overshadowed anyone else in the party.

[jaappleton]

I personally liken their Binder to the Mystic.

It covers too many bases and is rather too open ended, where it should be more narrow in scope as to what it can do. Otherwise you have that character than can do pretty much everything pretty well.

And that results in simply outshining the other party members, when in fact everyone needs time in the spotlight.

[Garresh]

Their old version wasn't that bad. The thing about a good generalist design is it should be passable but not optimal in all roles. A moon druid is a good example of this in tier 2. In tier 1 wild shape is broken af but tier 2 it's a nice option but isn't going to hold up to a dedicated frontline. Same with their healing(worse than cleric), damage(worse than a lot but they still have decent damage spells), control(pretty good but wizard is still better), etc.(No face though). I love generalist builds and if done right you can be a stable pillar in your party, acting as the backup to someone else's spotlight.

I know people think generalists are very anti-dnd but that's not true in an edition that doesn't have clear party roled. In 2nd Ed I'd buy that but the playing field is a lot more level this time around. Tbh I might just start rewriting some mechanics to tone them down lol. The new version is a LOT more polished imho. You can tell they worked hard on it. Just some mechanics feel out of place because they could outclass the specialists.

Edit: Imho a good generalist can be awesome at encouraging someone else to shine. If your party is all combat with one rogue who really wants to stealth, having a mediocre generalists as his backup means he can do his thing without being completely isolated. I see this as the same for a lot of rules. Basically you just take up the slack if things go south, enable specialists, and generally help out. A good generalist should be more like a support in a lot of ways. But that's just my take.

[Chronos]

(No face though).
That's when you wildshape into a kitten, and just look at your target with those big cute eyes, and flop over and roll around on the ground.