Search results

I don't believe I've heard anything of the sort relating to "touch." There's probably specific portals that work "when you move into their square" or "anyone in their square can use a move action to end up in the other portal's square." Which would imply touch or stepping through. Edit...

I tend to side with the same definitions put forth on Wikipedia. It seems that these words have been adopted by many for use in improper context. Improper use has spread enough to possibly become a proper new definition. Though I consider that lamentable as it confuses the language. I see...

One thing Unarmored Agility makes me wonder about is if PHB3 will include Cloth armors that leather armor wearers will want. Or maybe leather armor wearers that will benefit from already existing cloth armors. It can't simply be them wanting to give Wizards and Sorcerers the +2 AC without...

It says what it says. The rest is just up to having an agreeable imagination. Maybe the cleave went overhead. Maybe a ton of things.

It seems he is wanting to simply discount character advancement/development for story advancement/development. Simply changing locale to represent change-over-time is insufficient. Players often have a need for their characters to grow, as well. This most commonly takes the form of power...

What creature is this? Tiamat?

What system? I could think of a couple of skill challenges in 4e, but then they become less interesting should the players decide to cross only one at a time.

Why you do this?

I'd say it's a fairly reasonable position to hold that the concept of "threatening" is inherently based in how one is percieved.

My Sorcerer hasn't fought a boss yet, but I do see myself focusing Chaos Bolt on the boss, while sending out the secondary attack to take out minions. Whether the boss is killed first or last will then depend on the encounter setup and how often I roll even.

As a player, it's pretty obvious. Don't bother going out of your way to point it out. We already know. Not only did we notice when it died from 1 hit, but we also noticed you weren't rolling damage. And that you have way too many tokens on the board for it to be a level appropriate battle...

If another party member is standing at the intersection of two halls, I'll be damned if I don't use him to send my chaos bolts around corners.

Hitting on the DM's wife. Raiding his fridge.

Secondary attack rules are on page 59 of PHB1. Reading it over, I note that it says "allow" and "if you can." The wording is permissive instead of insistent. As an example of insistent effect, look at Chaos Sorcerer Unfettered Power feature, which says "you must" with regards to the result of...

I have no idea where I found it. Maybe I made it up. I can't find it again if it's there.

Nifft, you've got some splainin' to do.

I'm going to have to be doubtful on this claim until I look at my DMG. Because this exempts Devils.

Dunno, I don't recall the exact wording, but the DMG was written before PHB2 so they may not have considered the possibility of Immortal PCs. I think it would be fair to deny them that. It doesn't exactly go into full detail of the superpowers this language presents, but it seemed mostly just a...

Because of what I stated earlier, I'd also like to point out that taking Supernal is nearly pointless for PCs. While Immortals who know Supernal (all of them) can speak the language to be understood by everyone and understand everyone else's language, the PCs don't get that bonus. The net...

Supernal is a special language that itself includes magical effects and can be understood by all when spoken by an immortal. When a PC learns Supernal, they get none of that special stuff. But a PC can learn it, just not at level 1. There is a specific citation of that in the books, but I don't...