Results 1 to 7 of 7
Thread: Dread Necro// Totemist
-
2009-12-08, 03:22 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Dread Necro// Totemist
So I am thinking of playing a dread necro // totemist in a gestalt game. But is it really worth it. I was going to try using mainly touch attacks and use the totemist to buff them with natural attacks . I have to start at level 1 so tomb tainted soul is going to be my feat there. But what races are recommended, I'd really like to keep dread necro but can ditch totemist in favor of a better combo.
also in regards to Charnel Touch
At will, but no more than once per
round, she can make a melee touch attack
against a living foe'Stralia: Now a campaign setting (D&D 3.5 E6)
-
2009-12-08, 04:24 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
Re: Dread Necro// Totemist
Charnel Touch is a touch attack, not a touch spell. You can't hold its charge. It doesn't apply to natural attacks.
It's a standard action to activate, so I'm not sure why that phrase is there.
-
2009-12-08, 04:37 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
Re: Dread Necro// Totemist
Normally a Su is a standard action, but if it's not a touch spell then the touch attack can't be automatically subsumed in that action unless the ability explicitly says so IMO. As it is Charnel Touch simply fails to make sense.
Personally I'd rule the activation is subsumed in the attack action, it seems the intent and it's balanced. Since it's not a touch spell it can't technically be used with a natural attack ... but that I'd simply houserule.
In the end though 1d8+x extra damage a round isn't going to make or break the viability of the character.Last edited by PinkysBrain; 2009-12-08 at 04:43 AM.
-
2009-12-08, 06:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: Dread Necro// Totemist
really i'd prefer to play it by RAW atm, also more interested in character builds the touch attack while part of the build is not so integral i can't do without.
Would binder be better than totemist? or am i looking in all the wrong places. If by raw the touch attack is part of an unarmed or natural attack would taking monk levels be worth it?'Stralia: Now a campaign setting (D&D 3.5 E6)
-
2009-12-08, 06:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
Re: Dread Necro// Totemist
-
2009-12-08, 07:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2009
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: Dread Necro// Totemist
what id really like to do is make charnel touch worth having later on as more than just a touch healing spell for myself, and since this is gestalt i was hoping it would be manageable, I am trying to be towards the higher end of power here but i need to play through all 20 levels (hopefully)
'Stralia: Now a campaign setting (D&D 3.5 E6)
-
2009-12-08, 08:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2005
- Location
Re: Dread Necro// Totemist
The damage is trivial, so it's not going to happen. Scabrous touch is useless, it's contagion with free quickening the latter of which is very nice, the problem is that contagion sucks. Enervating touch is basically a freely quickened melee enervation, which is kind of nice ... but given the use per day limits hardly something you can build a character around.
Building a character around touch attacks is perfectly possible, charnel touch not so much ... at best, if the DM agrees with me and it's activation is subsumed in the attack, it's a nice little damage bonus.Last edited by PinkysBrain; 2009-12-08 at 08:07 AM.