Search results

I love this monster class- I've got one as a 3rd level NPC in an upcoming game I'm running. I'm waffling on whether to use 3.5 at all... I haven't upgraded, so I may stick with 3.0 for now. Is there anything wrong with the class in terms of 3.0? Does it look right? -B

I'm trying to find a very basic .pdf 3.5/3.0 character sheet with forms so I can type on the sheet, but one without any 'helpful' calculations or anthing like that. Just blanks to be filled in. Preferably one page as well. Thanks -B

1 min/level pretty much boils down to "1 combat or encounter" so why not just use this sort-form spell duration instead? Spells with tactical uses can either last for a few rounds, the entire combat, or longer spans. When it comes right down to it, the DM still conrols whether you get to use...

I love background feats- I use several in my games: Nobility- more or less as above, you get the Diplomacy bonus and access to levels of society otherwise denied you. Mystery- you are a memebr of a mystical secret society, with a bonus to a skill or save based on the mystery's ethos- for...

So 'slam' is just a generic blunt force attack. Still, the name isn't great. But still- why do vamps get the negative level thing? It doesn't fit the creature all that well. -B

Vampire monk though- very Shaw Brothers 'Seven Golden Vampires' Cool -B

What the heck is a slam attack anyway? I don't like D&D's take on vampires all that much... do they drink blood, or do they touch drain levels? Mah. -B

How much tweaking would d20 M really require to be a working fantasy game? The exchange of some skills for others certainly, and feats as well.... hmmm.... yeah, I can see what you mean. I just really like the idea that the basic classes are non-task oriented and your interpretation of a...

Hey yeah! Super cool- thanks. I'll pour over these and come back with somthing useful to say. -B

Yeah, I'm right there with you. I was thinking of a sort of 'entry level' feat, with a tree-like progression of requirements: you can take Psi Sensitive (or whatever) at 1st level only- or you get it for free with your first level of Psionicist. It acts as a placeholder- either you get it...

Has anyone heard official justification for this change? The ability buff spell justification seemed reasonable, but I can't see one for this. I've never used this feat myself, and have never seen anyone use it either... there are just to many feats much much better than it is already. +1...

Cool, thanks folks, thats what I needed to know. But Quickened Spell would allow for this because casting the Q-spell is a free action, yes? -B

Perhaps an energy type which ONLY hits incorporeal or etherial creatures would be better... ectoplasm? ghostfire? I don't know. But I don't think it would be a bad mod for energy substitution. -B

Has anyone run a game using one of the various feat and skill based psioncics systems out there? It seems to work fine for Star Wars, and breaking it down this way would make it less like the existing wierd stuff system (spell casting). The two would also be better suited to coexist- a little...

OK, I'm an idiot for being unable to find the rule on this, but here is the question: Can a Wizard or Sorcerer (or other spellcaster for that matter) fight defensively (for the AC bonus) and still throw spells? If so, are there any special rules to cover this, and where would I find them...

No way- a familiar is a better deal than a metamagic feat by a long shot. You esentially get a companion creature which improves as you advance and extends the reach of your magic in addition to providing scouting and special bonuses- its more like 2 or 3 feats.

I'd just allow them to trade in the familiar for a metamagic or item creation feat. In fact, why not make Familiar are feat for everyone?

The toad has always sucked. Why else give you something as heavy as +2 con? Because toads suck. They sit there. They eat insects. They sit there some more. I mean, toad??? For pure cool-value alone, toads should get the boot.

Once thing I toyed with for Sorcerers was offering them in both Arcane and Divine flavors. Arcane sorcerers are just as described, but Divine sorcerers use the Cleric spell list (selecting domain access just as a Cleric does). Divine sorcerers lack familiars, but roll a d6 for hit dice...

Has anyone used d20 modern to run a more generic sort of fantasy game than you get with D&D? I'm considering it for my next game, and was looking for some actual play comments on the idea. -B