Were I the DM, I'd allow you to use it--and then you would see just how useful the feat is when a proxy or deity "deals with you as an obstacle" by sending you to meet the Great Unknown.
Not a lot of thought in this, really--Athar may be defiant, but they're not stupid.
You don't actually use it on the deity, although it's listed as an option. You use it on the deity's FOLLOWERS.
I'm sure by there not being a lot of thought involved in this feat that you noticed that it has two feats listed as prerequisites, right?
Yeah. Two feats. But this isn't that powerful a feat as the likely result would be that any character using it would go quite literally squish. The athar belive that dieties are not deserving of worship. They know that the powers are powerful. They are not stupid and they wouldn't be called powers if they wern't powerful berk!
Yes but the feat fails to mention. How the feat is successful. IE what saves are involved. What turning check result is needed to be succesful in what situations...
Then how do you turn a god's hd? It says that proxies and dieties themselves are suseptable to this or at least divine beings.
Then how do you turn a god's hd? It says that proxies and dieties themselves are suseptable to this or at least divine beings.
Lots of epic levels.
I'm curious why you would do it in the first place. Turning undead nullifies their threat making them cower against a corner or submit to your command or what not. This feat says 'If successful, the targeted being must deal with you as an obstacle before being able to continue on its way.' Basicly it's a way of picking a fight. Couldn't you do the same thing by walking up to the entity being turned and saying "Your mother was a hamster and your father smelled of elderberries!" in a fake French accent?
The mechanics of this feat are vaguely worded.
"...a way to use the divine power to turn undead against divine beings and their servants."
While it seems that we have interpreted this as expending a turn undead attempt to force divine agents to attack you, the wording as-is could easily also indicate that you can "turn undead against divine beings..." in that you can make skeletons attack them.
Secondly, you really need "abilty to turn undead" in the Prequisite entry, or it only makes it even more likely to be interpreted incorrectly.
Assuming that this works off of a cleric's turn undead ability, does using this feat use up a turn undead attempt for the day, the way a Divine feat does? If so, shouldn't the uses per day be based on this, instead of having their own count?
And what does it mean to physically block a target's path? You activate feats on your own turn, which is before or after enemies move, not at the same time. Is this to be used as an immediate action, allowing you to use it out-of-turn? How do you block the path of a person in D&D, when he can move any direction he wants in limits of his movement rate?
Most confusing of all, what does it mean to "deal with" the Athar using this feat? Does the being attack the Athar? Engage him in melee combat? Acknowledge his existence? Does he have to kill him or even incapacitate him? Is this some magical compulsion? If so, how long does he have to do fight?
Perhaps you missed this:
Yeah. I stand by my earlier statement.
Ok - so it's not that you're turning the *diefic followers or proxy* but that you're turning the *undead* they control, taking them over and using them against them?
Is there a special situation with undead that are not created by clerical magic? Like vampires?
If you're wondering about the confusion here - it's because the above sentence can read two ways: Some members of the Athar have actually found a way to use "the divine power to turn undead" against divine beings and their servants.
OR
Some members of the Athar have actually found a way to use the divine power "to turn undead" against divine beings and their servants.
So there's a question - is it the power or the undead that's being turned against the divine being. That's why English teachers scream about dangling participles.
Thanks, Clueless. I forgot what dangling participles were called. I tried to point out the same thing in my lengthy post above.
Is it: "[Some members of the Athar] have actually found a way to use [the divine power to turn undead] against [divine beings and their servants]."
OR is it: "[Some members of the Athar] have actually found a way to use [the divine power] to turn undead [against divine beings and their servants.]"
Behold the power of clauses!
Is it: "[Some members of the Athar] have actually found a way to use [the divine power to turn undead] against [divine beings and their servants]."
OR is it: "[Some members of the Athar] have actually found a way to use [the divine power] to turn undead [against divine beings and their servants.]"
Behold the power of clauses!
Though I have to admit - if it comes down to allowing you to turn a diety/followers - but doesn't do full turning (I.E. rebuke or make them cower and run away) - then it becomes basicly a way of picking a fight without protecting the one picking. You can do that by just calling names and making obscene gestures...
I think you all missed this line:
"You may use this feat a number of times per day equal to 3 + your Charisma modifier."
Any divine being within range, as if you were attempting to turn undead, can be forced to turn towards your direction deal with you before it can continue on its way. What this means in entirely up to the DM and the Athar using the ability.
I used the turn undead rules in the same manner that some other feat (that escapes me at the moment) used to preform some function far from the original design of the rules.
So - still - how is this different from just picking a fight? Most folks don't need a feat in order to pick a fight. What's the bennie to using this feat to do it? I'm not seeing where you're coming from on it.
It was designed with the PrC Fist of Divinity in mind. Not all athar go out of their way to convert people from their gods to the Great Unknown. Some take the fight directly to the powers and their servants. This feat benefits them by allowing them to interdict someone who would otherwise be able to walk on by without needing to acknowledge the athar's presence.
So basicly it's aimed to prevent the opponent from fleeing the battlefield/confrontation? Hm. Interesting approach to the idea...
The unfortunate aspect of the submission process and the amount of material I have is that it doesn't help that when I sit down to design things, I work out the connections on paper before I start writing things out. Thus, the finished product is interwoven with other elements to give a greater scope.
Perhaps you should speak with the section heads about geting your own subsection within House Rules for your envisioning of the Factions, that way it will be much easier for people to make informed judgements of your work by looking at it as a whole.
I've informed them as to the amount of material I have completed before I began submitting things.
Annoying yes, but that's about all it seems. It strikes me this is either going to be useless, abused, or simply on a meta-gaming level utterly annoying. Sure it may be cute the first few times you do it, but after that people might just start taking pot shots when they see you coming up the street.
And while the Athar may not believe in the power of the dieties, standing physically in front of one and annoying it DEFINATELY shouldn't be encouraged!