Honestly, CS is more or less a flip of the coin how they rule. I've seen SO many answers that contridict OTHER CS answers that I more or less ignore them.
As far as sage advice, it's actually wirth a look. However, WOTC has put out MANY errata's. If it had indeed been repeatedly stated it should be in one.
Now personally I don't see powers making hindering terrain unless the power actually comes out and says it does. It depends if you think zones = terrain. I see terrain as as set features instead of temporary powers.
Honestly, CS is more or less a flip of the coin how they rule. I've seen SO many answers that contridict OTHER CS answers that I more or less ignore them.
As far as sage advice, it's actually wirth a look. However, WOTC has put out MANY errata's. If it had indeed been repeatedly stated it should be in one.
While I agree about CS not necessarily being the most reliable source, I tend to put more stock in them when they're consistent on a topic.
Regarding errata I don't believe you'll see it in cases that are considered clarification rather than actual rules changes. In this case the idea is that they're not running counter to the the information printed in the DMG, but rather those rules are meant specifically for terrain and not for powers.
__________________ Oni
"Each man, one way.
Each horse, one stance.
Each church, one buddha.
Each master to his own technique."
Well to me that doesn't make any sense about the clairfications. If you keep seeing repeated questions about something, how hard is it to tell it's not clearly stated in the book? I would argue that several errata's to date HAVE been clairifications.
Target [Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 57
Add the following sentences to the end of the first paragraph: “Some powers include objects as targets. At the DM’s discretion, a power that targets a creature can also target an object, whether or not the power lists an object as a potential target.”
Hunter’s Quarry [Revision/Addition]
Player’s Handbook, page 104
In the first paragraph, replace “enemy nearest to you” with “nearest enemy to you that you can see.”
Wall of Ice [Revision]
Player’s Handbook, page 165
Replace “As a standard action, a creature can attack one square of the wall” with “A creature can attack the wall.”
Now personally I don't see powers making hindering terrain unless the power actually comes out and says it does. It depends if you think zones = terrain. I see terrain as as set features instead of temporary powers.
As far as this goes, I'm with Elec, only powers that say they create terrain create terrain.
__________________ Gary Hoggatt - www.garyh.net "Such heroic nonsense..."
So when exactly in July does AP become Legal. Because tomorrow is my birthday and Vashik was hoping to get new power/feat access for my birthday. And I am still thinking 2nd character may be arcane in nature.
Secondly, any of you judges in your highspeed accessibility and judgely powers know what character roles/classes we have a distinct lack of here in L4W? Maybe that will help me with 2nd character decisions as I am playing my first choice elsewhere on EnWorld.
Just an impression, but we seem to have a lot more strikers than anything else. So if you want to help reinforce a thin spot in the community (and have an edge in getting into games), I'd say.... NOT a striker.
__________________ Gary Hoggatt - www.garyh.net "Such heroic nonsense..."
Come join us in the Shifting Seas and Transitive Isles of Living 4th Edition, amazing adventures and great fun guaranteed!
Then to play community 4e in Eberron join us in LEB too! Give life to your characters and contribute to the living settings!
Please excuse my poor English. It is not my first language.
Come join us in the Shifting Seas and Transitive Isles of Living 4th Edition, amazing adventures and great fun guaranteed!
Then to play community 4e in Eberron join us in LEB too! Give life to your characters and contribute to the living settings!
Please excuse my poor English. It is not my first language.
Well, it just so happens that last week or so I did an accounting of all the approved characters we have in L4W. This was before the most recent rash of characters submitted, and also before the MMC leveled up and became the first 3rd/4th level characters.
Anyway, I've attached the resulting table. An addition that I didn't have in the table:
Strikers: 36
Defenders: 23
Leaders: 17
Controllers: 13
I find it interesting how human wizards are the most popular race/class combination. I definitely wouldn't have predicted that.
I'm not up to date on my figures, but those numbers are consistent with previous summaries. We've always had an excess of strikers and a shortage of leaders and controllers.
Even in 4e they can't "fix" the problem that people want to play the ass-kickers (strikers) who can potentially take down a foe in one hit, than the one who's stuck healing (even though it's only a minor now)
Oh, as an aside I sure like how both my PC's are the only one of their race being played (at least for now, I'm sure others will play devas)
I'm planning to try a controller for my second character. Human Druid from Ea, for whatever that's worth. (I'm not so surprised that humans are a popular choice for wizards, the human's extra at-will is especially nice for controllers.)
But my first character has to reach level two first, correct? Any chance of "affirmative action" for controllers allowing me to slip the second one in a bit early?
I'd like to reiterate the quotes on the word fix above, because I don't think we have a real problem yet. Having at least two strikers in a party of five is probably a good thing.
If we ever run low on leaders then we will have a real problem that we need to fix (no quotes), imho. From my limited experience, leaders are the only 'must have' role.
Last edited by nerdytenor; 30th June 2009 at 07:33 PM..
Reason: rewritten for improved coherence
Yeah, we've always been very striker-heavy, and I do think that's a common problem. Like I said when I made Tristan, I was reluctant to make a striker because we're already flooded with them. Unfortunately, avengers are just too awesome, and I had to make one
I like how both of my PCs are the only one in their race/class combination (though that may change for elven avenger). Does it make me an elf lover that both are elves?
Looking at that table is interesting, though. For example, it seems that warlords were more popular when L4W started than they are now, because they're tied for the most 2nd level characters, but have very few 1st level characters. I also wonder what it says about ranger and rogue players that there's so few above 1st level (For the record, I love the rogue class as well, and had thought about rolling a rogue instead of Raiyek.)
Something else to note is that the table I posted includes all approved characters, even ones who have never showed their face in the tavern, or who have disappeared mysteriously. The numbers for actual active characters may be different, but I think it's safe to say that there's still more strikers than anything else and a shortage of leaders and controllers.
I find it interesting how human wizards are the most popular race/class combination. I definitely wouldn't have predicted that.
That was predictable. You have only 1 Controller class, so even if there is less controllers, they are all Wizard (well until PHB2 was approved, but it is pretty new). And then, Human are among the best Wizards as they can gives +2 Int and the extra At-Will Power is really great to wizard.
__________________ Living ENWorld di Senzio's Magical Shop, the best place to buy and sell magical items in Orussus
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
