Search results

Unfortunatly RAW forbids throwing melee weapons that do not have the heavy/light thrown property. Except in one instance...The Katar :hmm::-S:confused: Why is this ? Because improvised thrown weapons weigh 1 lb. ALL weapons either weigh more or have the heavy/light thrown property attatched to...

PHB p.277 Marked IS a condition. You take a –2 penalty to attack rolls for any attack that doesn’t target the creature that marked you. EDIT: Also PHB p.76 A creature can be subject to only one mark at a time. A new mark supersedes a mark that was already in place.

I second this, very nice indeed ! I wish I where that good, my pictures always end up much less detailed and bland :(

True, but so can a group of PC's, wich is why it's important fighters need to be "sticky" so the others can do their stuff. A THW adds a little stickiness, a shield lets them be stickier a little longer. Again milage may wary depending on the DM's tactics and choice of monsters for the...

Yes thats correct, good catch ! But it's still quite a bit of shield nerfage I'd wager. Just incase I wasnt clear (I think I was though) the "houserule" was not intended for use, only show my abstract way of thinking...Sort of Agreed. Exactly, this is very much my line of thinking. It would...

Well I do think, a calculation like this might not even be possible. If we eliminate all variables then we have no numbers to work with..If we allow them we have too many. Anyway, I made a longer post earlier but internet failure fluked it away, and I cant be bothered reposting all of it...

Yay awesome sauce, I like awesome sauce ! Using cleave or reaping strike on an OA seems like it could be useful alot of times. Maybe even sure strike if we really want that runner stopped, and how about tide of iron...Oops ? We cannot really account for powers, feats and magic unless it...

Indeed, I'm thankful for taking this down a notch so I can follow along better :) I know, that is my argument. Or more presice, my argument is that it does NOT equal out in relative "worth", but it SHOULD. I assume we are using a stable calculation here wich has the random element accounted...

I don't think its meaningless, what I'm trying to get at is that the AC and HP systems work differently. And a +2 bonus to one system is plain better than a +2 bonus to the other. This is made even more clear if we take your example and assume we fight nothing but minions. This would render the...

I'm not sure I agree...But different topic :) Sure, but probably done better with a pure ranger ? Especially since the multiclassed fighter still cannot use a non-offhand in his offhand (I think atleast AFB so ca't check it) I don't see how it affects the outcome much.

But there is no real advantage to dual wielding magical weapons either right ? Barring special ranger powers (that I know admittingly little about) you cannot attack and benefit from both weapons at once. All attacks is resolved from the main hand weapon, with the off-hand only providing some...

Yes I knew this, I made a rough estimate and did not account for magic or feats etc. And I took care in mentioning this aswell. However I disagree that 45 is "far more" when a monster (or group of monsters collectivly) may have 1000+ HP in comparison. Right, can you try again, and keep it...

Well, maybe there isn't one. Sometimes things like rationality and logic has to give way for game mechanical balance. There is no real reason other than it conflicts with the rules about magic slots. Whats the "reason" I cannot pimp out with 8 magical rings really...Same thing. There is a huge...

Well I never said it wasn't. :) Since ALL ways of reading it bug me in one way or other I simply took the one that bugged me the least. It has a goldylocks syndrome going here.. 2-4 attacks seems like too much. 1-2 attacks seems like too little. 2-3 attacks seems just right. Doesn't that...

Uhm..What ? No that is not at all what happends, or atleast not what I meant to display. THIS is what I meant to display: Its the part in red there that does not belong in the original text, it's the 4:th attack that mysteriously comes out of nowhere. The part in yellow is infact not...

No I doubt it, sorry. Again compare it to Fangs of steel to see. See what they did there, they put the weapon bit in twice. If Storm of blows would give up to 4 attacks it would have a double weapon input aswell. Like this:

Double post

Well as my sig says, English isn't my first language. But there is no way I can read 4 attacks into that, it must be 2 as standard and 3 with requierments. For undexterous non spear/flail/light blade fighters that still makes it a pretty solid lvl 3 encounter power. For those that meet the...

Hmm as I read it, it's only two attacks (assuming the requierments are met) Cleave for instance is NOT two attacks since the second target automaticly takes damage if the first target is hit. EDIT: the more I read it the more I change my mind. After comparing it with other powers I now think...

Yes I do belive you are missing something. Personally I find it odd but I see the game mechanical value of it to make the system less complicated. 1. Everyone in 4e is basicly ambidexterous. Meaning both hands are equally good. It doesn't matter to the game mechanics if you are right handed or...