Suggestion: Add Sonic, Force and Light (Radiant) Bloodlines to Draconic Incarnation

[Chacka]

Right now, Draconic Incarnation covers the "classic" dragon elements – fire, electric, cold, acid and so on – based on the chromatic and metallic dragons. I'd love to see three more bloodlines added for Sonic, Force and Light (Radiant) damage.

There is a solid D&D lore basis for all three, thanks to the Gem Dragons:

• Force – the Amethyst Dragon, whose breath deals force damage across multiple editions
• Sonic – the Sapphire Dragon (thunder/sonic), with the Emerald Dragon as another classic sonic option in older editions
• Light/Radiant – the Crystal Dragon, whose breath deals radiant damage in 5e

So these wouldn't be just "homebrew" – they're established dragon types that fit the destiny's theme perfectly, while adding a more exotic, psionic flavor alongside the traditional chromatic and metallic bloodlines.


I already know the likely counter-argument: "those elements are covered by other destinies." But when you actually look at how the spell power is distributed, that argument doesn't really hold up:

• Sonic is supported by Fatesinger
• Force effectively only shows up in Shiradi Champion
• Light is in Exalted Angel and Shiradi

Meanwhile, Fire is supported by several destinies (Exalted Angel, Draconic, and others), and Light appears in more than one as well. So the principle that a damage type can be supported by multiple destinies is already established in the game. If Fire gets to appear in several trees, there's no consistent reason why Sonic, Force and Light shouldn't also be available through Draconic Incarnation.

This would give casters using these three elements more build freedom instead of being locked into a single destiny – and thematically, it just makes sense for a dragon-based destiny to eventually cover the full range of dragon types, not only the most famous ones.

 

[pinstripedbarbarian]

Honestly, I think adding options, as you suggested, gives less build flexibility. It forces you into a tree if you want to specialize in force or whatever is not supported in DI already. If you are a nuker, DI should be your main focus.

When the game options become "if you are X, you have to pick Y" that is the antithesis of build flexibility.

Increasing the amount of viable options for a type of character does not “give less build flexibility” in any way. Having multiple options for a build literally gives players freedom to choose different things and flexibility in how they build their characters. Forcing every spellcaster into the same ED removes all choice in the matter.

It’s like taking a stance of “it isn’t fair unless I can have Draconic Incarnation fit my specific build every time” and any other options aren’t worth considering. If you think every ED that isn’t DI is worthless, that shows that other EDs need improving to be on par with it, not that DI needs to encompass even more stuff so no one ever needs a different ED. Otherwise, why bother having other EDs? Why not make every caster DI and just get rid of Magus and Exalted and the rest? "Forcing you into a [non-DI] tree if you want to specialize in force" and "forcing you into DI if you want to deal damage as any kind of spellcaster" both limit your options in a way, but the first one doesn't end in every single blaster picking the same thing.

And there’s no reason multiple trees can’t be viable for a specific specialization. If Magus was improved to handle Force (and Cold and Negative) well enough to compete with DI in overall effectiveness, and then Shiradi got better spellcasting options focused around Force, and then Shadowdancer got a couple potent Force SLAs to work better for casters… would that still be “less build flexibility” just because DI doesn’t do Force as well?

Suggesting one popular tree should be able to please every build ignores the dozen other EDs that could be improved to better fill more niches. Every form of caster should have options, but they do not have to all be the exact same options. That just leads to more homogeny as everyone would wind up doing the same thing.

 

[Chacka]

When the game options become "if you are X, you have to pick Y" that is the antithesis of build flexibility.

Increasing the amount of viable options for a type of character does not “give less build flexibility” in any way. Having multiple options for a build literally gives players freedom to choose different things and flexibility in how they build their characters. Forcing every spellcaster into the same ED removes all choice in the matter.

It’s like taking a stance of “it isn’t fair unless I can have Draconic Incarnation fit my specific build every time” and any other options aren’t worth considering. If you think every ED that isn’t DI is worthless, that shows that other EDs need improving to be on par with it, not that DI needs to encompass even more stuff so no one ever needs a different ED. Otherwise, why bother having other EDs? Why not make every caster DI and just get rid of Magus and Exalted and the rest? "Forcing you into a [non-DI] tree if you want to specialize in force" and "forcing you into DI if you want to deal damage as any kind of spellcaster" both limit your options in a way, but the first one doesn't end in every single blaster picking the same thing.

And there’s no reason multiple trees can’t be viable for a specific specialization. If Magus was improved to handle Force (and Cold and Negative) well enough to compete with DI in overall effectiveness, and then Shiradi got better spellcasting options focused around Force, and then Shadowdancer got a couple potent Force SLAs to work better for casters… would that still be “less build flexibility” just because DI doesn’t do Force as well?

Suggesting one popular tree should be able to please every build ignores the dozen other EDs that could be improved to better fill more niches. Every form of caster should have options, but they do not have to all be the exact same options. That just leads to more homogeny as everyone would wind up doing the same thing.

That my suggestion asks for DI to support every build is a big exaggeration. I just think DI should support every damage caster build at least as a secondary or third ED. If DI supported Force damage, it wouldn't change much for my current build – maybe I'd consider the Dragon Breath if it did Force damage, but the epic strike in Shiradi isn't too bad either, since it's also CC if you have the DC for it.


And if DI really were the only real main ED option for all casters as soon as there's a draconic bloodline for their preferred damage type, that would be a strong sign that either DI should be nerfed or the other EDs buffed!

 

[pinstripedbarbarian]

Why force DI to support every damage caster build though? Why not spread the love to other EDs? Why add even more types to a tree that covers 6 types instead of expanding one of the many trees that only cover 3? Especially as a non-primary ED, why does it HAVE to be DI instead of a different tree?

If you want DI on your Force build, you can take DI on your Force build. Core gives universal power, a bunch of SP cost reduction, and eschew and improved eschew. T1 gives Spot, Search, Reflex, MRR, PRR, AC, Fort, no-auto-fail on 1 for Fort, Concentration, UMD, and more spell power. That is a lot of great stuff within splash range that works regardless of caster type.

If your response to that is "but it doesn't do anything for force specifically" then again I ask: why does every caster build need DI instead of a different ED? Imagine if Magus got Force options for its Epic Strike and its puddle. Or Shiradi had a Force version of Hunt’s End that did a ton of damage. Or Shadowdancer’s Mantle could add a bunch of Force damage on every attack or spell. Are those less acceptable because they aren't Dragony?

 

[Chacka]

Why force DI to support every damage caster build though? Why not spread the love to other EDs? Why add even more types to a tree that covers 6 types instead of expanding one of the many trees that only cover 3? Especially as a non-primary ED, why does it HAVE to be DI instead of a different tree?

If you want DI on your Force build, you can take DI on your Force build. Core gives universal power, a bunch of SP cost reduction, and eschew and improved eschew. T1 gives Spot, Search, Reflex, MRR, PRR, AC, Fort, no-auto-fail on 1 for Fort, Concentration, UMD, and more spell power. That is a lot of great stuff within splash range that works regardless of caster type.

If your response to that is "but it doesn't do anything for force specifically" then again I ask: why does every caster build need DI instead of a different ED? Imagine if Magus got Force options for its Epic Strike and its puddle. Or Shiradi had a Force version of Hunt’s End that did a ton of damage. Or Shadowdancer’s Mantle could add a bunch of Force damage on every attack or spell. Are those less acceptable because they aren't Dragony?

If there were another ED that really supported Force damage – Machrotechnic, for example – I'd have no problem switching to that one. But DI is the most obvious ED for that purpose. I just feel that for many DPS caster types DI is a good option, while others are basically locked out – even if the small amount of universal spell power it provides is of course better than nothing.

And isn't your suggestion to add Force (Sonic and Light) damage support to other EDs basically the same as mine, just in a different flavor?

 

[pinstripedbarbarian]

If there were another ED that really supported Force damage – Machrotechnic, for example – I'd have no problem switching to that one. But DI is the most obvious ED for that purpose. I just feel that for many DPS caster types DI is a good option, while others are basically locked out – even if the small amount of universal spell power it provides is of course better than nothing.

And isn't your suggestion to add Force (Sonic and Light) damage support to other EDs basically the same as mine, just in a different flavor?

Yes and no. It is the same in the sense that I'm suggesting other EDs that already have Force in their kit could do whatever DI would do if Force got added in. Maybe not with the exact same look or numbers or whatever, but in broad strokes yes, the DI and non-DI options would be similar, at least mechanically.

However, it's not the same in that adding more to DI would only make other EDs less and less likely to be chosen. For example, right now Shadowdancer is okay, but it's got one of the worst Mantles, it has very little spell support despite offering Force power, and overall it's just not as strong as it could be. DI already does its own job pretty well. Making it so DI starts doing stuff SD could/should be able to do would only increase the gap between the two, whereas powering up SD's Force kit would bring it more in line.

I guess my point is this: if the goal is to have more robust and legitimately useful options for Force based spellcasters, there are multiple ways of achieving that goal. Adding a new dragon to DI, adding Force to Magus's Cold/Negative options, or any number of other things can do that. So if we can achieve THAT goal in several ways, then we should pick a way that can also address other problems (like Shiradi's spellcasting being kinda lackluster, or Magus forgetting that it can do Force) rather than making an already strong option even stronger.

 

[Contessor]

I guess my point is this: if the goal is to have more robust and legitimately useful options for Force based spellcasters, there are multiple ways of achieving that goal. Adding a new dragon to DI, adding Force to Magus's Cold/Negative options, or any number of other things can do that. So if we can achieve THAT goal in several ways, then we should pick a way that can also address other problems (like Shiradi's spellcasting being kinda lackluster, or Magus forgetting that it can do Force) rather than making an already strong option even stronger.

This is exactly how trees work for all playstyles. EDs, from their creation in DDO, have always had a primary focus, with fate points buying extra special preferences. When they switched to trees, they added build flexibilty by replacing twist points, with more active choices. To add too much flexibilty takes away good options and ultimately build flexibility. Look at warlocks, they have no specific tree supporting their class features and playstyle. Having specific trees focused on a specific playstyle is required, otherwise all classes would end up like warlocks at end game. You invest heavily in a primary tree that focuses on that characters abilities. Melee, ranged and spell users all have the same focus. Melee are only differentiated by THF, SWF or TWF between thier two trees. Casters favoring Evoc will be in DI, unless you are an ATr, as their main tree.

And honestly if Magus boosted force, it would only make ATr even better at being the highest DPS casting option, which is the antithesis of what you are suggesting as build flexibility. At least being in DI, it is a single element focus, with minor support for a secondary. This would force all DPS caster to be an ATr with magical ambush and go Magus, or be an inferior caster. This is the definition you provided yourself.

 

[saekee]

For hybrid builds there are only two trees in which the cores and a few other selections give spellpower and those are SD and Fatesinger. It seems odd that Divine Crusader does not give spellpower anywhere. I hope this is not a derail.

 

[pinstripedbarbarian]

This is exactly how trees work for all playstyles. EDs, from their creation in DDO, have always had a primary focus, with fate points buying extra special preferences. When they switched to trees, they added build flexibilty by replacing twist points, with more active choices. To add too much flexibilty takes away good options and ultimately build flexibility. Look at warlocks, they have no specific tree supporting their class features and playstyle. Having specific trees focused on a specific playstyle is required, otherwise all classes would end up like warlocks at end game. You invest heavily in a primary tree that focuses on that characters abilities. Melee, ranged and spell users all have the same focus. Melee are only differentiated by THF, SWF or TWF between thier two trees. Casters favoring Evoc will be in DI, unless you are an ATr, as their main tree.

And honestly if Magus boosted force, it would only make ATr even better at being the highest DPS casting option, which is the antithesis of what you are suggesting as build flexibility. At least being in DI, it is a single element focus, with minor support for a secondary. This would force all DPS caster to be an ATr with magical ambush and go Magus, or be an inferior caster. This is the definition you provided yourself.

You're still saying "if you are X, then you have to be Y" like it's an inevitability, which it isn't, and doesn't restrict flexibility, which it does.

You are simultaneously doomsaying that everyone will just pick the strongest thing which would cripple flexibility and also advocating for everyone to be able to just pick the strongest thing so it promotes flexibility. Are we supposed to always pick the same thing or not?

If every tree is supposed to be the epitome of their shtick, and DI is the only one that gets to do spell damage, then what roles are other caster trees like Magus or Primal Avatar supposed to fill? What is the difference between Melees having different trees for THF, SWF, or TWF and Casters having different trees for energy, force, light, etc.?

And don't act like Magus getting better at force would be more unbalanced than giving DI a force option. If you're so upset about ATR being too strong, you shouldn't advocate for giving it Force breath that paralyzes enemies and double-Force-Greater-Ruin. If increasing ANY tree's force power isn't acceptable just because of ATR, then that is a problem with ATR being too strong, not that force is.

 

[pinstripedbarbarian]

For hybrid builds there are only two trees in which the cores and a few other selections give spellpower and those are SD and Fatesinger. It seems odd that Divine Crusader does not give spellpower anywhere. I hope this is not a derail.

Shiradi also gives some, but only Ranged without Melee. It just leans heavily into Ranged that the caster side gets forgotten a lot of times. And yeah, Divine Crusader does seem like a good fit for Light and/or Positive.

 

[Contessor]

You're still saying "if you are X, then you have to be Y" like it's an inevitability, which it isn't, and doesn't restrict flexibility, which it does.

You are simultaneously doomsaying that everyone will just pick the strongest thing which would cripple flexibility and also advocating for everyone to be able to just pick the strongest thing so it promotes flexibility. Are we supposed to always pick the same thing or not?

If every tree is supposed to be the epitome of their shtick, and DI is the only one that gets to do spell damage, then what roles are other caster trees like Magus or Primal Avatar supposed to fill? What is the difference between Melees having different trees for THF, SWF, or TWF and Casters having different trees for energy, force, light, etc.?

And don't act like Magus getting better at force would be more unbalanced than giving DI a force option. If you're so upset about ATR being too strong, you shouldn't advocate for giving it Force breath that paralyzes enemies and double-Force-Greater-Ruin. If increasing ANY tree's force power isn't acceptable just because of ATR, then that is a problem with ATR being too strong, not that force is.

You are not exactly following me. I said DI for evocation, which also happens to primarily be damaging spells for most classes. Spell schools are similar to melee styles. That is the similarity. ATr is not treated the same, since they rely on skills more than anything else.

I love ATr, but giving them anything more is too much, especially when other casters need more support. And if you read my previous posts in this thread, I specifically said I do not want to see a force version in DI. I do agree that DI could be better support other elements, although. Not sure what you are rambling on about, it seems you are the only one going in circles about trying to make your point. Force is supported in Shadow Dancer and Shiradi already. And ATr will prefer to spend in Shadowdancer already. We do not need another tree supporting force, hence my comment below posted again for the reading challenged.

Not going to agree with force. They should include Sonic with Electric and Negative/Poison with Acid. Another Bloodline with Light and Aligment should not be a bad addition. It kind of goes with a Gold Dragon Heritage.

 

[pinstripedbarbarian]

You are not exactly following me. I said DI for evocation, which also happens to primarily be damaging spells for most classes. Spell schools are similar to melee styles. That is the similarity.

And I disagree that spell schools should be the only factor that separated trees. If they were, they why does every spell school DC boost in every ED offer 4 schools to choose from?

I agree that CC casters (primarily enchant and illusion schools but also spells in some others) should also get strong dedicated tree support, but I do not agree that one tree should have a monopoly over spell damage just because one spell school equates to the majority of spell damage.

And if you read my previous posts in this thread, I specifically said I do not want to see a force version in DI.

I apologize then that I misunderstood and thought you were also saying DI should be force since I was arguing against it in the post you responded to. That is my bad for not catching that. I stand by my point that ATR should not decide if Force gets better support elsewhere, since other Force builds suffer for it. I see the merit in improving existing Force trees if people see them as subpar, and if ATR is the only thing standing in the way, either it needs to be nerfed or the trees need to be improved in ways that don't overpower ATR even more.

Not sure what you are rambling on about, it seems you are the only one going in circles about trying to make your point.

Because you don't exactly seem to be following me. And admittedly I misunderstood one of your stances as I stated above, but you either aren't seeing my point or don't care.

You seem to want trees to be dedicated, focused, yet versatile. I have no issue with that. What I don't want is putting all the spell damage eggs in the same ED basket. Other trees already cover other types of damage, and improving them only gives players more good options to play in different ways. If you just don't agree that those options would be good, that's fine, but if I ask "what's wrong with a different ED doing spell damage" then saying "because DI does damage" doesn't answer the question.

If Exalted became really good at blasting but only using Light, Fire, and Positive, that wouldn't make DI any less potent at what it does (even with Fire, DI would almost certainly be better). If DI added Light to its list, Exalted would have even less appeal for Light casters because it can't compete.

We do not need another tree supporting force, hence my comment below posted again for the reading challenged.

To be fair, your previous response to me was when I said something against adding a force dragon, and your second paragraph even includes "At least being in DI..." as if that was part of the argument, which is why I responded the way I did. Again, that is my misunderstanding, but I really don't think that's a huge leap for me to make. I'd appreciate if you didn't insult people's reading abilities just because context in one of your posts didn't clarify the contents of a completely different one.