Recent content by angry monkey

personally I'd just plead your case to the dm. IMC familiars become more of a liability at higher levels, and are more useful at lower levels. So if I were ypur dm and you buthered to take the feat, I'd cut you some slack.

The srd says this: Which implies that one can learn which image is real, and retain the knowledge of which image is real until they are again confounded (by movement for example). I don't see where it implies that one attack gives the enemy the ability to learn which one you are for the next...

Hyp was closer to the proposed intent of my suggested abuse, a pc wizard dominates a pc sorcerer, who then believes that the orcs are his friends, and will be magically healed by his repeated fireballs even though they look like they are getting hurt. IMC that would be ruled an abuse, and the...

what about a party that Dominates a third party mage, and uses it to attack persons not actually foes of that mage? Or some other magical effect that might convince a mage that their enemies are not their foes, and won't be hurt by the offensive spell? How about if the mage willfully fails...

Nail: On to the larger discussion. It seems to me that it comes down to the fallibility of the English language. As Jeff can attest, even long debated and scrutinized laws cannot always be written in a manner that excludes all possible mis-interpretations. I would not be the first to say...

Can you take the full attack action and incorporate a five foot movement in between your attacks?

I'm playing in a pretty advanced campaign, we all play characters that dish out some serious damage. Except the ranger. He sometimes hits, but his short sword damage is not much compared to the ogre fighter with keen spiked gauntlets (and improved crit, of course). Anyone have advice on how...

amen. (you left out lower hit points)

*ahem* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Good one.

Fast little blue guy - You are right again. I usually end up getting my expert tactitian actions when someone is flat footed, or when I'm under improved invisibility, I hadn't thought of regular invisibility or feinting. Wierd word man - I don't think you are correct about all the attacks...

Hoy Hoy Mate! No worries about grammer here, just a pop of a nib over the dangle. (sorry, when I was in England, everything sounded like that and I can't stop myself this morning) So, no you don't get multiple attacks when you hide as an action, if you are already hidden you can make...

what everyone is saying, in simple terms, is roll for each opponent.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but a surprise round is only one action, right? I thought that what he was saying was that he was in combat, and then hid. When you do that, your opponent still has an initiative, and is still acting in combat, therefore isn't flat-footed. They are quite taken aback...

Only problem is that once you grapple them (assuming you win the opposed check) you have to wait another round to get an action to damage them. I'd recomend fighting someone who uses arrows with appendages, then you could trip them, and with improved trip, get a free attack on the little farts...

Or you could also have her lose something like one level of abilites per game that she doesn't follow the vow, and gain back one level of abilities per game that she follows the vow. I know this is straying from the original VoP pretty far, but it sounds like something you'd see in a cheesey...