The Bez-Kismet; or, a rebalanced Hexblade with a much more original name!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M. Mayonnaise

Well, first of all, this class is officially my new favorite gish ever. :smallbiggrin:
Very cool fluff and all, abilities seem very cool and useful as well, though I'll leave the game balance stuff to those more educated in such things than I.

---

I agree with this, totally. I love the idea of anti-anti- for some reason. Arcane blademasters are awesome! I think it was already resolved, but I also agree that friendly fire stinks. I do not believe that is a good way to resolve balance issues.

First and foremost, I noticed a little thing I need to change on the spell list; for some reason, Bez-Kismet gain Protection from Evil instead of Protection from Good. Maybe I keep it, maybe I don't. You tell me.

Another thing: how important is StumbleUpon? For some strange and odd reason, someone stumbled (pun intended) upon this thread around June of last year and posted a link on it. In fact, I found it while looking for the thread in Google (since I decided to test a change of browsers from Firefox to Opera, which has a history search system much like Internet Explorer) and, for the lack of a better word, "stumbled upon" it. Any of you guys did this, by any chance? You don't need to mention it, in case your privacy is valuable, but you can mention it through PM if you want to. I just found that pretty odd. That's...basically a whole new level of nice (if not awesome).

Also: Dreadlord. It's nice when you take stuff from a retooled class and apply them to another, nicer class. Just saying...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T.G. Oskar

First and foremost, I noticed a little thing I need to change on the spell list; for some reason, Bez-Kismet gain Protection from Evil instead of Protection from Good. Maybe I keep it, maybe I don't. You tell me.

---

Evil people do fight other evil people, so it's strategically advantageous to have that edge on them. Plus, you have plenty of room for neutrals in Bez-Kismet that would otherwise fit in with a Good party, so having access also makes sense against their typical foes. Finally, I find a mercenary type Bez-Kismet would love having access to any of the 4 varieties for using against the current enemy. Just another tool in the toolbox.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by T.G. Oskar

Also: Dreadlord. It's nice when you take stuff from a retooled class and apply them to another, nicer class. Just saying...

---

Someone raided your class for goodies? D=<

Question, Oskar: how would you explain the presence of both Bez-Kizmet's and Malefactors in the same game world? I've got a pair of players that want to play each one, respectively, and I'm kinda trying to figure out how it fits T_T

I'm not Oskar, but I don't see why they couldn't fit. The Malefactor's flavor is "I tap into cursed blood" and the Bez-Kismet is basically "I alter the threads of destiny, for it has abandoned me."

Over simplifications, maybe, but their flavors don't begrudge one another.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NineThePuma

Someone raided your class for goodies? D=<

---

Ah, not really. It's more raiding my stuff for goodies. It should be an interesting thing to see. It's just that I don't want to say anymore and it's as close to a second original class than most of my retools, even if I went safe this time and done a lot of recollection from other classes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord_Gareth

Question, Oskar: how would you explain the presence of both Bez-Kizmet's and Malefactors in the same game world? I've got a pair of players that want to play each one, respectively, and I'm kinda trying to figure out how it fits T_T

---

I think Nine nailed it, but to be more specific:
Mechanically, they can't oppose each other. The Malefactor has invocation-like Maledictions and a fighting style closer to the Rogue, while the Bez-Kismet has a fighting style closer to the Paladin and traditional arcane spellcasting. The base Malefactions + Torment the Weak are functionally different from the Bez-Kismet's Curse of the Fateless. To make things worse, they have a distinctive synergy coming from stacking penalty sources: the Bez-Kismet's Aura of Misfortune and the Malefactor's Maleficent Auras would provide a heavy penalty, then the Bez-Kismet would use his Curse of the Fateless to provide a heavier penalty, then the Malefactor ends the battle with yet another Malediction AND then both enemies hit a severely punished creature (the Bez-Kismet through traditional melee combat using Tainted Wounds, the Malefactor through Torment the Weak). A Bez-Kismet/Malefactor/Necromancer would be a brutally horrible group to face, if only because the group will have so many penalties against each other.

If the Bez-Kismet and the Malefactor were to face each other, though, things would be balanced. The Malefactor would do the traditional penalty stacking and the Maledictions would be brutal enough to behold, but since they're not spells, they can't be resisted (and worse, the auras of Dissonance and Negation don't affect the Malefactor), but the Miser's Fortune ability of the Bez-Kismet would swallow a huge lot of the penalties. So, they'd be a nice match.

Finally, and what worries you, might be their interaction through fluff, which is what Nine mentioned. The Malefactor has a flavor tied to deceit and underhanded tactics; the Malefactor uses his curses and banes gained through birthright because s/he wants to, and because they are necessary for his fighting skills. The Bez-Kismet, on the other hand, has a larger fluff behind; he's cast off Fate aside, and he actively fights against it, and through casting off destiny and allying with dark powers interested in seeing how this individual sets up, he writes up his own path.

The Malefactor would be closer to a Sorcerer in terms of how its fluff works, as the Malefactor is born, not built, into what s/he is. The Bez-Kismet, on the other hand, isn't born into one (not even close); he forms into one, realizing Fate probably has a bone to pick against him/her, and he draws upon the misfortune acquired by directly and unequivocally opposing Fate to his benefit. In that sense, a Malefactor and a Bez-Kismet may be facing the same odds or facing opposite sides quite easily.

If it makes it easy with a mental image: imagine Envy telling Niam "chill out, dear; you don't have to be so stuck up against destiny. Fate doesn't exist; it's just what losers say to blame their losses". Niam would then respond with "that's because you haven't had someone against you. Fate does exist; otherwise, I couldn't go and give it the finger, now ain't I?" Even power-wise, they wouldn't conflict against each other; the misfortune of the Malefactor is his/her birthright, while the Bez-Kismet draws power from the misfortune s/he makes by facing Fate (or the Powers that Be). To make it the simplest; it's Nature (Malefactor) vs. Nurture (Bez-Kismet).

Next question: why did you preserve the alignment restriction on the class? Yes, a lot of its abilities are certainly dishonorable (read: chaotic), but outside of certain religions that I will not be mentioning further and which are not the default in D&D, Fate does not equal "Good" "Nice" or even "Proper". Imagine a Bez-Kizmet devoted to shattering prophecies of great disaster or lifting curses of misfortune from powerful heroes, or that honestly sees Fate as a cruel force and opposes it in the same fashion that paladins oppose gods of evil. What is stopping these people from both using their powers and being of good alignment?

I find it interesting to note that the reverse question was never asked of my Malefactors or my previous Hexblade rewrite - that is, no one ever asked why they didn't have an alignment restriction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord_Gareth

Next question: why did you preserve the alignment restriction on the class? Yes, a lot of its abilities are certainly dishonorable (read: chaotic), but outside of certain religions that I will not be mentioning further and which are not the default in D&D, Fate does not equal "Good" "Nice" or even "Proper". Imagine a Bez-Kizmet devoted to shattering prophecies of great disaster or lifting curses of misfortune from powerful heroes, or that honestly sees Fate as a cruel force and opposes it in the same fashion that paladins oppose gods of evil. What is stopping these people from both using their powers and being of good alignment?

---

Part of it is tradition (it is a retool of the Hexblade, after all, with an entirely different fluff), but there's a sense to it.

Basically, the choice to defy Fate isn't particularly an evil choice (quite the contrary, it makes for the only sane choice when destiny stacks it upon you), but once you delve into that path, you're asked to do questionable actions. The Bez-Kismet, quite frankly, could be a purely Neutral character (and most likely they're Neutral; remember, they're the "friendlier" ones because they're less worried about facing Evil or promoting it, or likewise with Law, and worried about the day-to-day events while remaining detached) or Chaotic Neutral (individualists that have a hard time making friends but whom value the very few ones they make). In fact, they'd rarely be Lawful, but Lawful Neutrals CAN be stoic, which is a nice fit for the odd Bez-Kismet (namely, stoic fatalists which consider their fate inevitable and that they're doing the impossible, but with the grim determination that they might be wrong and thus their actions may have a point). Evil, of course, cares little for questionable actions, and may act good so as long as it fits its interests.

Good, however, has its issues. If the Bez-Kismet tries to escape a prophecy that will spell certain doom but will end up making him a hero (and the Bez-Kismet really doesn't care to be a hero), he can be Neutral or Evil but rarely Good (since the Good choice in this matter would be to sacrifice, mind you). Likewise, a Bez-Kismet that tries to escape a fate in which certain doom befalls the world because of him (think the Antichrist in Good Omens) will have all the reasons in the world to become Good and face Evil, but deep down, he'll be gripped with fear that his actions may provoke his downfall, and thus he's more likely to fall.

Finally, this is because the Bez-Kismet makes for a formidable anti-hero. Anti-heroes CAN be good AND dark at the same time, but they're better when they're amoral (from mild to severe). It's hard to maintain a dark, grim facade when you're really rooting for altruism and sacrifice (the biggest sacrifice of a Bez-Kismet, after all, would be to accept his fate IF it really means the best for the rest and thus betray his motives), while it's far easier to make a questionable choice that may threaten the rest of the world but give him a chance to escape his destiny. The last thing you want, after all, is to have a situation similar to what makes Paladins fall: a Bez-Kismet that has a choice to sacrifice his beliefs for the sake of the world or to sacrifice the world for the sake of his ideals. It would make for a formidable third choice ("I choose MY ideals...AND the world as well!") but you might realize just HOW difficult would be to balance that. If I were to betray that, I'd make that bit of a fluff pointless if only because the choice wouldn't make you lose your powers, while keeping Good out of the pathways of defying fate makes for those unlikely heroes to surface while preventing moral impasses (which are more common for Good heroes than anyone else, anyways).

Though, personally, it's because I want to. I mean, those steps above are great explanations (or excuses, your choice) for why to do so, but there WILL be always counter-arguments about the matter of why someone can be Good, dark, and anti-heroic.

Yes, they make for great anti-heroes, but they also make for stunningly good idealists. Imagine, for a moment, a CG Bez-Kizmet, who stands as living proof that Fate can't just be fought, but beaten, that free will is the most potent force in the universe and also one of its greatest responsibilities. Can you not imagine Eldarins taking up the mantle to combat manipulative forces like the Archdukes of Hell or the machinations of Mechanus? Sure, it's an emphasis on the 'freedom' aspect of the class, but I can very easily imagine a wide-eyed idealist fighting Fate because Fate is the biggest bully around.

After all, it's not like every Kizmet is going to be an intellectual or even all that philosophical; they know someone or something (Fate, the gods, their imaginary friends) kicks 'em down and pushes them around. Might this not lead to them fighting not just for themselves, but for everyone else who just can't catch a break in the universe?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord_Gareth

Yes, they make for great anti-heroes, but they also make for stunningly good idealists. Imagine, for a moment, a CG Bez-Kizmet, who stands as living proof that Fate can't just be fought, but beaten, that free will is the most potent force in the universe and also one of its greatest responsibilities. Can you not imagine Eldarins taking up the mantle to combat manipulative forces like the Archdukes of Hell or the machinations of Mechanus? Sure, it's an emphasis on the 'freedom' aspect of the class, but I can very easily imagine a wide-eyed idealist fighting Fate because Fate is the biggest bully around.

After all, it's not like every Kizmet is going to be an intellectual or even all that philosophical; they know someone or something (Fate, the gods, their imaginary friends) kicks 'em down and pushes them around. Might this not lead to them fighting not just for themselves, but for everyone else who just can't catch a break in the universe?

---

To me it sounds like you want the alignment restriction changed to Any Non-Good or Any Chaotic. I could get behind that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cieyrin

To me it sounds like you want the alignment restriction changed to Any Non-Good or Any Chaotic. I could get behind that.

---

Eh, in a perfect world there'd be no alignment restriction (I never used one for the old Hexblade either) but if Oskar was dead-set on having one then yeah, I'd say Any Chaotic or Non-Good would work just fine for me (Thus making the choices CG, N, CN, LE, NE, and CE).

So, I've been paying a Bez-Kismet in a small arena game and maybe it's just cause I optimized poorly, but I came away from the game feeling undereffective, and on level up to 2nd, am seriously considering switching classes completely.

Curse of the Fateless is an alright ability, even if the DC is really low; I decided it would be better to take a Feat Tax and snag Ability Focus, but even I was very reliant on others to deal out damage. I was hoping that leveling up to level 2 would fix this somewhat.

Unfortunately, Miser's Fortune does nothing to give it any sort of benefit to its survivability at level 2, and I still don't have the offensive power to really be able to handle a fight.

All in all, at low levels I find myself disappointed in the Bez-Kismet; its offense is limited strictly to a curse that is defensively oriented, and it is utterly reliant on native offensive abilities, and with the pull to Cha for the curse, I find myself worse at that than a non-gishy class would be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NineThePuma

So, I've been paying a Bez-Kismet in a small arena game and maybe it's just cause I optimized poorly, but I came away from the game feeling undereffective, and on level up to 2nd, am seriously considering switching classes completely.

Curse of the Fateless is an alright ability, even if the DC is really low; I decided it would be better to take a Feat Tax and snag Ability Focus, but even I was very reliant on others to deal out damage. I was hoping that leveling up to level 2 would fix this somewhat.

Unfortunately, Miser's Fortune does nothing to give it any sort of benefit to its survivability at level 2, and I still don't have the offensive power to really be able to handle a fight.

All in all, at low levels I find myself disappointed in the Bez-Kismet; its offense is limited strictly to a curse that is defensively oriented, and it is utterly reliant on native offensive abilities, and with the pull to Cha for the curse, I find myself worse at that than a non-gishy class would be.

---

Mind telling the exact build, then? I would be worried if you used a two-handed weapon and still had a bit of problems.

I could observe the problem if you were using a shield, because it's exactly the same situation as the playtested Paladin (in the Project Heretica thread); it dealt too little damage because it was limited to a 1-handed weapon. If I were to replace (or add) Charisma to damage, it has to be with good reason, because adding Charisma to damage on a 2-handed weapon is really asking for trouble.

Furthermore, there are a few decent 0-level spells you could use, namely Daze and Touch of Fatigue which can be used in tandem with Curse of the Fateless. They require a Fort or Will save, but the curse removes part of their resilience.

I must admit, usually I'm...well, I would say I'm wired for late blooming. The idea that a character should start strong doesn't really suit me, so it's hard to gauge for something that's strong but not overtly strong. Thus, the way the Bez-Kismet is made (along the fact that it generally starts much like the regular Hexblade, which by deference should also be weak at first level) doesn't allow for insane amounts of damage at 1st level. Finally, remember the Bez-Kismet was made before the changes introduced in Project Heretica (if any), so it requires a bit of fine-tuning.

Still, I'd like to see exactly how the build was done. If it's wielding a shield (even a light shield) there's a 99.99% chance that's why it feels so weak (esp. if you dump Strength). It also depends on the point-buy range: if you go for Charisma 18, your curses will be relatively hard to resist but your damage will be pretty weak, and the Bez-Kismet may work pretty well with Con 14-16 for purposes of hit points, with Strength between 14 and 16. Also, whether it was a human or another race, because a single dice is harmful.

Finally: dice happens. I have players that constantly pull 17-20 on their dice rolls, and I blame the technique they use compared to the technique I use, but when it's time for saves, I constantly roll no less than 14 on the d20. Thus, a mean in rolls that's superior to the average will definitely make you see weak, because they'll make the saves more often than not. How exactly optimized the others are is necessary to know, because you're probably feeling weak when someone deals 3d8+7 points of damage from level 1.

There are two ways I can work this out, one which could go online right at 2nd level:

• Add Charisma to damage, but only if you wield a shield (much like what I plan to do with the Paladin). That should increase its damage potential somewhat. Adding Charisma to attack, though, might seem a bit too far because you'll undoubtedly get a very high roll, compared to others (it's easier to have two stats at 16 than one stat at 22, for example).
• 2nd level Bez-Kismet don't have Diehard as the divine champions, so I *could* insert a bonus feat slot right there. That way, Ability Focus won't seem like a feat tax, and you could add Power Attack or another reasonable Fighter bonus feat to improve your combat skills.

I don't want to go overboard, since dealing exorbitant amounts of damage at 1st level isn't really something I aspire into. You could blame ToB and stuff like Punishing Stance for increasing the damage potential of a character from 1st level.

Did a few changes to the Bez-Kismet, which should hopefully deal with the lack of purely offensive options.

• Reduced accessibility to 1st and 2nd level spells. Now, Bez-Kismet can cast 1st level spells at 3rd level with the proper Charisma, and 2nd level spells at 7th level (again, with the proper Charisma).
• Bonus feat at 2nd level instead of 6th. This way, you can get the Bez-Kismet a solid offensive feat.
• Miser's Fortune and Curse of the Fateless combine now. If you successfully curse the opponent, you add your Charisma modifier to damage.

The last one is rather simple. Miser's Fortune is a cool ability, but just not a powerful ability for that level, at least not one that could justify standing alone. Immunity to penalties is a big one, but at that level there are very few penalties; however, the Bez-Kismet is limited to the same battle options until well after 4th level, in which at least can use Enlarge Person to become a better warrior. Making it dependent on Curse of the Fateless means it's really a hit or miss, but it also reinforces that you depend a bit more on Charisma than Strength, as if you really pull off the curse, the enemy is weakened and vulnerable to your own damage. Certainly, the effect could be improved so that it provides offensive damage to all allies (making it a buff) or that it works whether the enemy is cursed or not (so that it becomes a direct buff to damage), but I'd need some results on how it works.

Also, might consider adding another ACF, but based on a homebrew, which means I need the permissions for that. Kind of a "thank you".

I know I'm kind of late to the party on this one, but this is an *awesome* homebrew. I've looked over a bunch of your stuff, and it's all pretty sweet. Hexblade has always been such a cool, flavorful class, but I feel like this really makes them playable.

However, I feel like [along with several other of your classes] they're at least mildly over-powered. If I was going to play one, or allow one in a game I'm playing, I'd make the following changes:

Caster level is Hexblade level -4, minimum 1 [so they still cast at 16 at max level].

Reduce the usages of some abilities to 1 or 3 + Cha / day [they're curse ability, step into the unknown, limit the death ability to Cha/day or less].

Remove aura of dissonance or aura of negation [I feel like one of these is more than enough; alternatively, allow save of aura of dissonance to allow them to retain their caster level, as opposed to spells], and reduce the aura of negation DC [maybe it's just me, but 13 + 2O + Cha, which could easily be over +1O for a grand total of 43, seems high--maybe 1O + class level, or even half class level?].

Tone down the penalty reduction to 3 or 4 at its highest [let's face it, reducing all penalties is an *amazing* ability, and basically negates debuffs].

Maybe reduce the maximum range of auras to 6O--a 9O foot radius is a *huge* area.

Edit: Finally, I'd explicitly state [I don't know if you have] that they *cannot* get luck bonuses or use re-rolls.

I feel like this still leaves you with an incredibly powerful gish with tons of synergy and a caster's worst nightmare.

Again, I love all your classes, especially your paladin and warlock fixes--paladins are no longer jokes, and non-glaivelock/hellfire builds are viable for warlocks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by genericwit

I know I'm kind of late to the party on this one, but this is an *awesome* homebrew. I've looked over a bunch of your stuff, and it's all pretty sweet. Hexblade has always been such a cool, flavorful class, but I feel like this really makes them playable.

---

Much appreciated; better late than never.

Quote:

---

However, I feel like [along with several other of your classes] they're at least mildly over-powered. If I was going to play one, or allow one in a game I'm playing, I'd make the following changes:

---

Interesting conundrum. While I have no control over what happens at your table, I feel it's important to go point for point describing why I feel the change shouldn't (or hey, maybe should) go:

Quote:

---

Caster level is Hexblade level -4, minimum 1 [so they still cast at 16 at max level].

---

I...really can't ascribe to the idea.

Partial spellcasters never really cast at half their potential. Consider the following: they cast spells with a serious delay (their first spells are learned at the moment full and 2/3rds spellcasters are casting their 2nd level spells, their 2nd level spells when others cast their 3rd or 4th level spells, and they only reach up to 4th level spells at the moment other spellcasters are approaching 5th or 7th level), so they're stunted in that sense. They've got spells with lower DC, for starters, and absolutely ALL spells are blocked by a single one (Globe of Invulnerability). That alone makes them half-spellcasters. Their original reduction halved their casting potential even more, so they were one-quarter spellcasters (in the same way that when you double the size of a three-dimensional object you elevate its weight to the third power).

Now, any limitation of caster level (a la Pathfinder) really won't make much of a difference, except that their 1st level spells will suffer quite a bit. Consider that they'll get a CL of 1 for three levels (3rd, 4th, 5th), so that means they get pretty weak spellcasting. The original Hexblade has a CL of 2nd when they begin, whereas the proposal limits them to CL 1st at the same level, and the level afterwards. The proposal would equal the original Hexblade's CL by 7th level (both would get CL 3rd) and exceed it by 9th (when the proposal would give the class a CL of 5th). Most games are played at low levels, so you'd have to wait a lot to be good at your job. It practically begs you to get Practiced Spellcaster to make ends meet. On the other hand, as it currently stands, the Bez-Kismet starts with a CL of 3rd for their 1st level spells, which makes the few spells they have access to useful at their level, but they're still getting 1st level spells where others get 2nd, so they're still a wee bit behind.

Quote:

---

Reduce the usages of some abilities to 1 or 3 + Cha / day [they're curse ability, step into the unknown, limit the death ability to Cha/day or less].

---

Curse of the Fateless becomes a pretty strong ability, but the uses are fine if you think about it. With enough Charisma, you can use it about 8 times per day at, say, level 10 or so (Charisma 20 at the very least, plus the 2 uses you get from class levels), so that's the equivalent of using the curse on two enemies per battle. Since Curse of the Fateless affects only a single enemy, and it's limited to uses per day (because of the extended duration), forcing it to a "static" (at least, as static as your Charisma) amount of uses per day might be a needless nerf.

Step into the Unknown was a holdover of a previous crossover ability from the divine chassis (see Project Heretica for more details), where the Paladin had a flight ability that eventually because usable per day. That said, Step into the Unknown doesn't has a LOT of uses. At most, it becomes 6+Cha uses per day, which seems a LOT, but it's a move action (not a swift, or else I'd definitely limit it) and limited to your move speed (or double as a full-round action), so it's most likely you'll use it for battle.

As for the death ability...I reckon you mean Hex of Ending Fate. Well...the two limitations it has pretty much limits its uses per day. One, it's limited to how many Curses of the Fateless are running in combat, since it only affects THAT curse in particular (not the one from a Bestow Curse spell, for example, or Mark of Justice), and it has a save DC. The last thing you want is someone who can withstand (even with the penalty!!) the save DC, thus making you lose a daily use of your capstone. Once again, it's a capstone; pretty much the most awesome and interesting ability the class gets. In comparison: a spellcaster (Tier 1 or 2 most of the times) can use a spell which can kill one person per round (Implosion) and several at once (Wail of the Banshee) and other death-related spells (with their own save DCs) and can use them several times per day. A martial adept (Tier 3) with the Tiger Claw ultimate technique, Death from Above, can do it once every two rounds, and has a similar restriction. At least the last one, IMO, is pretty fair considering it's a melee class, and the Bez-Kismet is a gish so it should be pretty strong both physically and magically/supernaturally. Oh, and if the character succeeds on the Hex, it basically gets cured of the curse, so there's a strong element of risk involved.

In short: I don't really see a reason to reduce their uses per day, because each ability is right in the mid-point of "I've got a spare set of abilities" and "I wasted all of them", making the player able to choose carefully but still give it the chance to fire away with reckless abandon.

Quote:

---

Remove aura of dissonance or aura of negation [I feel like one of these is more than enough; alternatively, allow save of aura of dissonance to allow them to retain their caster level, as opposed to spells], and reduce the aura of negation DC [maybe it's just me, but 13 + 2O + Cha, which could easily be over +1O for a grand total of 43, seems high--maybe 1O + class level, or even half class level?].

---

The thing with Aura of Dissonance and Aura of Negation is the same as with, say, most of the Project Heretica classes: they have abilities designed to battle and succeed against a wide variety of spellcasters. I could agree with the idea of shifting the save DC of Aura of Dissonance to prevent loss of caster level, but it's a Will save, which is the highest save the caster has (so there's a BIG chance they'll succeed on it).

Aura of Negation's DC, on the other hand, is fair enough. Consider a typical spellcaster: because Concentration is only useful for spellcasters, there's a big chance they'll have it high enough, and probably maxed; that's a 23 to the save. Con is usually an important stat, so there's a good chance that Con will be high enough, so in the end, the spellcaster must roll within the range of 10-14 to succeed. That range is the sweet one, because it's right around the average or a bit higher. Now, assume that the spellcaster has enough Con to meet the Bez-Kismet's Charisma: that'd make the spellcaster's Con bonus equal to 33, so you only need a 10. Have we added any ability that grants a bonus to Concentration checks? Note that Concentration checks are pretty easy to boost, so there's a chance that any well-optimized (not even fully; well-optimized) spellcaster will succeed by taking 1. That makes Aura of Negation a non-ability, because you ALWAYS succeed on it. The current version's DC is designed in a way that, against a character with a skill bonus based only on max skill levels plus relevant ability score bonus equal to the user's relevant ability score, the target has to roll a 10, which is basically the "magic number". Against spellcasters with low Concentration, you have a deadly weapon; however, considering how you can stack only a few bonuses and gain a decent enough total bonus on any skill check, the Bez-Kismet is actually probably unable to enforce this ability.

Quote:

---

Maybe reduce the maximum range of auras to 6O--a 9O foot radius is a *huge* area.

---

Certainly, it's a pretty huge area...at 15th level. The reason why it's such a huge area is a combination of how the "Divine Champion" chassis is designed (all classes with the same chassis will share many of the same abilities) and how to keep archers and swift runners debuffed (at most, you'd keep frontliners debuffed, but they can block you and enemies only have to escape the range of your aura). Escaping from a 60' aura is easier than escaping from a 90' one. I might consider it, but don't hold me on that.

Quote:

---

Tone down the penalty reduction to 3 or 4 at its highest [let's face it, reducing all penalties is an *amazing* ability, and basically negates debuffs].

Edit: Finally, I'd explicitly state [I don't know if you have] that they *cannot* get luck bonuses or use re-rolls.

---

Quite frankly? Aside from what I added later on, I never was too happy with Miser's Fortune. I really wanted to explain how their fortune was so horrible, it couldn't get any worse, but I never had the chance to pull it off.

Thus, suggesting the re-rolls idea is pretty interesting. The ability won't be really nerfed (after all, the Charisma bonus to damage against cursed opponents is good enough), but it plays interestingly: you can't get luck feats, luck bonuses or any kind of reroll, and you can't use a reroll, but people can't use rerolls against you AND you negate luck-based penalties (you're unaffected by Prayer on either side, for example), so it's a fair trade-off. I'd have to consider how I can work on it, but it can be interesting.

Quote:

---

I feel like this still leaves you with an incredibly powerful gish with tons of synergy and a caster's worst nightmare.

Again, I love all your classes, especially your paladin and warlock fixes--paladins are no longer jokes, and non-glaivelock/hellfire builds are viable for warlocks.

---

Much appreciated for the pep-up. In any case, if you feel that your table will work better by using those suggestions, then go for it. I repeat, I can't control what happens on your table. I'd like you to consider each and probably state why each point's merit, but I've worked this class pretty well and I hesitate doing any change, unless it's for the best. Right now, it's not a Tier 2 by any measure, and it can barely reach Tier 3 because it can do one thing extremely well (debuff, particularly those pesky spell-casters) and do others moderately well (being a proper gish, for example).