FC II - How the Hell* Does Mark of Avernus Work?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

*Pun intended.

Mark of Avernus is a feat in the Fiendish Codex II, and I have no idea how it's supposed to work. It seems to me that it's dysfunctional:


You are a master strategist. Once per encounter, you can make a single ranged attack, melee attack, or use one of your spell-like abilities as an immediate action. In addition, whenever you successfully hit an opponent with an attack made as part of a readied action, you gain a +4 bonus on your attack roll and damage roll, and you automatically confirm a critical threat on such an attack.

You only gain a bonus to your attack roll if you've already hit with the attack? What?

Is that supposed to be "gain a +4 bonus on your next attack roll"?

[Biffoniacus_Furiou]

Looks like they wanted to make it +4 to the damage roll on a successful hit, then went back and made it +4 to hit and damage without editing the verbiage prior to that.

Just say it's +4 to hit, and +4 damage if it hits, plus all the other stuff.

[Mordante]

Almost all "evil" feats in Vile Darkness, FF & FF2 are garbage. Not sure why but it seems playing an evil character is really discouraged.

[pabelfly]

I love this feat, it helped me with a comp (here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24198719&postcount=47)). Was more focused on immediate action shenanigans though.

How I'd interpret it: readied attacks get a +4 to attack rolls, +4 to damage if they hit, and confirm if they crit.

I'd be more focused on the immediate action, though. Those are incredibly rare. You just need to find something that you want to use that can be a spell-like ability.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I love this feat, it helped me with a comp (here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showsinglepost.php?p=24198719&postcount=47)). Was more focused on immediate action shenanigans though.

How I'd interpret it: readied attacks get a +4 to attack rolls, +4 to damage if they hit, and confirm if they crit.

I'd be more focused on the immediate action, though. Those are incredibly rare. You just need to find something that you want to use that can be a spell-like ability.Huh. I'd completely glossed over that part in favor of the part I didn't understand. That is nice, although (obviously) I'd prefer more than 1/encounter.

But for what it's worth (and for future reference), psionic manifesting is considered a psi-like ability, and the Magic mantle forces magic and psionics to be identical, meaning it should also be considered a spell-like ability for this and other purposes...

[pabelfly]

Huh. I'd completely glossed over that part in favor of the part I didn't understand. That is nice, although (obviously) I'd prefer more than 1/encounter.

But for what it's worth (and for future reference), psionic manifesting is considered a psi-like ability, and the Magic mantle forces magic and psionics to be identical, meaning it should also be considered a spell-like ability for this and other purposes...

There are other ways to get spell-like abilities, including with Warlock, Shadowcaster and through feats and prestige classes, that you could find other some fund combos to turn into immediate actions if you want to try it without touching Truenamer.

Re magic mantle: "In addition, you always treat magic and psionics as identical, Therefore, powers such as dispel psionics work for both magic and psionics. Most campaigns already treat them in this manner, so this mantle is most useful in campaigns where they are considered different systems."

I don't think you can pull that trick off. The mantle just expliciates that the magic/psionic tranexesparency rule is in place if it normally isn't. However, that's normally expected, and the rules state there are still differences between spell-like abilities and psy-like abilities. Page 6 of "Expanded Psionics" says that "Psy-like abilities function much like spell-like abilities", which implies that the transparency doesn't make the two equivalent.

[Tzardok]

Could I get a reference please for "Manifesting is considered a psi-like ability"?

[pabelfly]

Could I get a reference please for "Manifesting is considered a psi-like ability"?

Expanded Psionics Handbook, p65.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

There are other ways to get spell-like abilities, including with Warlock, Shadowcaster and through feats and prestige classes, that you could find other some fund combos to turn into immediate actions if you want to try it without touching Truenamer.

Re magic mantle: "In addition, you always treat magic and psionics as identical, Therefore, powers such as dispel psionics work for both magic and psionics. Most campaigns already treat them in this manner, so this mantle is most useful in campaigns where they are considered different systems."

I don't think you can pull that trick off. The mantle just expliciates that the magic/psionic tranexesparency rule is in place if it normally isn't. However, that's normally expected, and the rules state there are still differences between spell-like abilities and psy-like abilities. Page 6 of "Expanded Psionics" says that "Psy-like abilities function much like spell-like abilities", which implies that the transparency doesn't make the two equivalent.Except the Magic mantle isn't transparency. Even in full transparency, magic and psionics aren't identical. The Magic mantle is far, far more than just transparency. Saying "it's transparency and no more" is vastly underselling it.

You would have to change "Psi-like abilities function much like spell-like abilities" into "Psi-like abilities are considered identical to spell-like abilities," otherwise, they're not identical.


Could I get a reference please for "Manifesting is considered a psi-like ability"?From the SRD:


Special Abilities
[...]
Psi-Like Abilities (Ps)
The manifestation of powers by a psionic character is considered a psi-like ability, as is the manifestation of powers by creatures without a psionic class (creatures with the psionic subtype, also simply called psionic creatures). Usually, a psionic creature’s psi-like ability works just like the power of that name. A few psi-like abilities are unique; these are explained in the text where they are described.

[pabelfly]

Except the Magic mantle isn't transparency. Even in full transparency, magic and psionics aren't identical. The Magic mantle is far, far more than just transparency. Saying "it's transparency and no more" is vastly underselling it.

You would have to change "Psi-like abilities function much like spell-like abilities" into "Psi-like abilities are considered identical to spell-like abilities," otherwise, they're not identical.

From the SRD:

Okay, a more succinct argument: spell-like abilities aren't actually spells and aren't under the rules of Magic Mantle. I personally don't think Magic Mantle is making psionic-like abilities spell-like abilities.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

Okay, a more succinct argument: spell-like abilities aren't actually spells and aren't under the rules of Magic Mantle. I personally don't think Magic Mantle is making psionic-like abilities spell-like abilities.Except spell-like abilities are still magic and psi-like abilities are still psionics, and "You always treat magic and psionics as identical."

[Troacctid]

Except spell-like abilities are still magic and psi-like abilities are still psionics, and "You always treat magic and psionics as identical."
No, pabelfly has a good point. Nothing in the text says to treat PLAs like SLAs. It only says to treat the overarching power sources as identical. It's pretty well established that two abilities, or two types of abilities, can have different rules, even if they're both magic or both psionic. (Su) and (Sp) abilities are both magic, and they're not identical, for example.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

No, pabelfly has a good point. Nothing in the text says to treat PLAs like SLAs. It only says to treat the overarching power sources as identical. It's pretty well established that two abilities, or two types of abilities, can have different rules, even if they're both magic or both psionic. (Su) and (Sp) abilities are both magic, and they're not identical, for example.Does he, though? Identical means identical. So if X-like abilities aren't treated like Y-like abilities (aside from their particular mechanics, of course; specific overrides general, after all), that doesn't exactly fit the definition of "identical," does it. And psionics can be [Su] just as much as magic can, else a lot of psionic abilities wouldn't actually be Supernatural. And some are.

[Chronos]

Quoth MaxiDuRaritry:

But for what it's worth (and for future reference), psionic manifesting is considered a psi-like ability, and the Magic mantle forces magic and psionics to be identical, meaning it should also be considered a spell-like ability for this and other purposes...
Both the Magic Mantle and the normal transparency rules say to treat psionics like magic. Neither one says to treat psionics like spells specifically. There are lots and lots of kinds of magic in D&D, and spells are only one of them. Binders and incarnates, for instance, both do magic, but neither one uses spells nor spell-like abilities. Likewise, a psionic character with the Magic Mantle also does magic, but also doesn't use spells nor spell-like abilities.

[Troacctid]

Both the Magic Mantle and the normal transparency rules say to treat psionics like magic. Neither one says to treat psionics like spells specifically. There are lots and lots of kinds of magic in D&D, and spells are only one of them. Binders and incarnates, for instance, both do magic, but neither one uses spells nor spell-like abilities. Likewise, a psionic character with the Magic Mantle also does magic, but also doesn't use spells nor spell-like abilities.
A psionic character without the Magic Mantle does magic too! Psi-like abilities are already explicitly both psionic and magical, according to the rules for psi-like abilities.

[animewatcha]

Going back to the Mark of Avernus thing. 5e has some abilities that you spend your reaction/interrupt to do things like 'potentially turning a hit into a miss'. Some of these can be done after the die is rolled and added up total, but before damage is rolled for.

Isn't there anything in 3rd edition anywhere that does this?

[pabelfly]

Going back to the Mark of Avernus thing. 5e has some abilities that you spend your reaction/interrupt to do things like 'potentially turning a hit into a miss'. Some of these can be done after the die is rolled and added up total, but before damage is rolled for.

Isn't there anything in 3rd edition anywhere that does this?

The Pious Soul feat does that, letting you add 1d6 to a roll after the roll is made, but before finding out the result. It's very flavourful but usually better to just add a hard bonus that always works.