can you verify this? Up until now, I thought you couldn't get a spell as a ritual if it doesn't explicitly have the [ritual] tag in the spell description...An excellent point. As you've noted, I didn't state that the Binder could cast ritual spells, but seeing how their primary class feature is a ritual, it seems silly to not give them that ability. As for disguise self, there are a bunch of abilities that say something like "you can cast [a spell] but only with a target of [restriction]", or "you cast [spell] without the usual material cost", or "you can cast [spell] but with a duration of [something]" and various other ways of modifying spells slightly, so I don't think there would be a problem with saying "you can cast disguise self as a ritual taking ten minutes" or something to that effect.
I hope you don't mean binding DCs, because that's not a priority yet. I mean saving throw DCs from vestiges - let's not dwell on it too much:I haven't worked out suitable DC values for the various levels yet; that's next on my to do list.
"The DC for any saving throws required by your binder abilities and any abilities and spells granted to you by vestiges is equal to 8 + Your Proficiency Bonus + your Charisma Modifier." Rephrase if necessary. NEXT!
I'll work on that in the future, then. Though for the record, nobody needs to know the legends by heart, it's mostly story material, which IC the Binder will either learn on his own or via an NPC. No flash cards are really required for that.I totally agree, and the binder in my party does indeed pay great attention to the legends and such - it's just that when we're playing, we try to keep everything to hand and not have to dive into sourcebooks because that holds up play. I've even got a little card - kinda like a card from Magic: The Gathering or something similar - with my weapon stats and effects on it. It's just so that we can refer quickly to the rules portion of what we're doing, and if the DM wants to check something we can just hand over a card with the relevant rules and rolls on it.
Pretty much everything takes this format. When/how do I get this ability, what does it do in roleplay/plot/flavour terms, and how do the rules represent that. No intermixing. It makes it much easier to work out which bits you need to copy out if you want to write up a quick summary on a card, or a spare space on your character sheet. I'm not advocating throwing out the flavour text; I just appreciate the way that 5e makes it easy to extract rules from flavour, and I'd like to emulate that.[/QUOTE]
You got it, boss!
@The Doctor: I recommend trying to come up with some new stuff to add to a vestige, as well as replicating the original abilities when possible. Like I did, giving Naberius Vicious Mockery, or the ability to sniff out authority figures. Amon's very annoying special requirements are being developed into giving his host a competitive edge against celestials, fiends and (eventually) his/her fellow binders.
We got a new template now, I say check if it works for Focalor and add what you think fits to fill in blanks
Also - avoid flat bonuses and penalties when possible, 5e is very careful with it's math to avoid inflation. Perhaps aura of sadness might let you use your reaction to impose disadvantage on attack rolls against you within 5 feet for the round. Or something - might be strong, not sure, still better than a flat number penalty.
Lastly, these are very high binding DCs aren't they?
@Anaxi: you forgot to put in 4th level spells somewhere, if you have to give a binder normal access to normal spells, at least pay him minimum wage.
I don't know if I'm that keen on the binder getting permanent "side effects" from his involvement with vestiges. A: because he's already persecuted enough as it is. Having permanent signs is much harder. and if half of what they're saying is true, then eternal damnation is already a big enough side effect. and B: he gets tons of signs from vestiges, and some of which can already be used in combat. This is redundant IMO.
I may have said this before, don't remember... I have a different idea for what you could do with subclasses.
My idea is to focus on a binder's affiliation with pact magic (I.e. there are different career directions a binder might choose to follow) that might double as pact-magic factions in a campaign, which would give the binder class features with a unified theme from early level and throughout mid-levels. It would also reserve some of the vestiges to be accessible only via these subclasses, who share a common color and theme for a binder who favors a specific role.
I'm thinking of the format being similar to Cleric's Domain (learning a few vestiges who have something in common throughout a set of levels, at least 1 or 2 of which are exclusive to the subclass; gaining a few new abilities the binder could rely on independently from his chosen vestiges, and one that adds a new option to an existing class ability in an exclusive way... Perhaps Pact Augmentation? but that could be the sleep deprivation talking...)
As of right now, I'm thinking of three subclasses: ______ of the Prince (starring Tenebrous, focusing on dark and demonic powers), ______ of the Emperor (crowning Dantalion and dealing with vestiges and abilities who revolve around magic and mysticism) and the ______ of the Duke (featuring Zagan, focusing freaky changes to the binder's body to take down foes) I will try to build the exclusive star vestiges to be worth the same level, which would make placing fitting them into an archetypes easier :3 another nice thing I could do for bonus points is to work like WotC into offering multiple levels of complexity for whoever wants. This is in the works and in the idea stage presently, I'm posting what I have before it gets any further so I don't get as disappointed if you all say it sucks
(working on a general name for them, and these names are tentative and all. Also, I'm not at ease with stealing the name "Binder Fates" which I admit is a wicked name. I'm thinking about "Constellations", or "Pledges", but again - it's tentative)