Recent content by anhar

alright so I have a pretty basic question. I've never been sure about balance making you lose your dex. Do you lose it for the whole round, or just until you move off the surface you were balancing on? I ask because I have an all-rogue campaign coming up and wands of Grease are going to be...

I've only had one situation where Vorpal weapons came into play, and it was in 3e. we had a paladin, fighter, and wizard fighting an advanced, armored, hasted balor. it had a +3 Vorpal Sword rather than +1. we fought if for a while, every time it attacked physically, we would cringe. Finally...

I never played it. but I always wanted to. I've never even met anyone who's played it. I think the lack of character creation rules in the main book kinda help that situation. (not that I don't think thats an awesome and totally hilarious idea).

I've got some friends who are crazy over palladium, and especially RIFTS, but I never could understand the fascination. Maybe it's just because I'm used to HERO system and 3.X DnD, but the Rifts books were nearly unreadable for me, and combat especially was largely undecipherable. And the...

well the HP are nice, but the hardness still doesn't apply vs. adamantine :)

Ok so this came up in a game a few days ago. I remember in 3.0, there was a rule that a magical weapon couldn't be sundered except by a weapon of equal or greater plus. Does that rule exist in 3.5? I can't find it, but I may not be looking in the right place. On top of that, the item that...

man, the amount of "neither" votes on here make me feel much better about my neither vote. granted, my girl is out of town at a billy joel concert with her mom , but still... who the hell still listens to billy joel? and who, having a non-gaming S/O that doesn't despise this holiday, would...

I went with monk. They really need an overhaul. I suppose in a low magic game, or a game where the PC's get captured and disarmed all the time they might be nice, but never really seen one I thought was worthwhile. Bard rocks once you've got more than 4 people in the party. In my campaign...

I voted 3.5 some of the changes weren't spectacular (face/reach and the buff spells irk me), but fixing what the auld grump called "the H spells" and the actual existence of a class "progression" for rangers really did it for me. (yay for players who take more than 1 level of ranger!)

I have a major houserule for sorcerers (though it gets complicated enought that I'm thinking of just straight out reducing them to an NPC class) and some minor houserules for a few feats (Dodge) and a few spells (Web)

The group I played in lasted about 6 sessions, a little over a month. I DM'ed section A with another group, and it was pretty much godawful. maybe it was just the route they took, but they didn't run into any humanoids (except the orcs in the beginning) in three sessions. after that much...

Well it looks like for the upper level rods it's almost exactly half the cost. As a further tribute to the splatbooks crappiness, the rods there break the rules for normal magic items. if it's more than 200k gp, it's supposed to be either an artifact, or an epic item, which is made with...

Oh god I just looked at 3.5 wish and you're completely correct, DungeonMaster. Thank god I found that before my PC's did. It does say that you lose 2x the experience cost for making a magical item if you wish for it, but I don't think that applies if you use a ring/scroll/spell like ability, so...

oh, and not to spam-post, but bards in 3.5 can cast spells in light armor with no chance of failure. In my 3.0 PHB it says bards get standard spell failure chances. I'd much rather not have spell failure in light armor than have the ability to wear medium armor.

I'm going to try not to bicker, here. You make some more interesting points, DungeonMaster. I hadn't considered the metamagic rods, as I haven't had a campaign go above 12th level in 3.5 {got one to 26th in 3.0, legitimately. started at 1st}. You have a good point. They can certainly be...