Recent content by drachasor

Yeah, but if that sort of thing has been done to you before, then you think you might be wise to it. Especially if your Will Defense is quite high. Honestly, I am somewhat tempted to make it a Strength vs. Will with a secondary attack. I am worried that would make it too weak, however. Even...

How popular, I wonder. Probably it would be most popular with wizards, but when I was making a Warlord I didn't feel like I'd want to spend a feat for another at will. Wizards already have a lot of feats to take too, improved initiative is definitely more important for them. As for those that...

Oh I wouldn't (and won't) ban it either. Btw, it is much worse if there are two or three wizards in the scenario (or archers, really). Using the power itself doesn't make much sense if you only use it on one person, after all.

The Fighter ran up to a Wizard who has Ray of Frost. Nothing special about the terrain and there is plenty of room for the wizard to retreat. Like almost all wizards, he'd want to avoid getting into melee at all costs. How about that? Come and Get It can make sense 95%+ with a little work...

That wouldn't bother me so much. What is odd is when you have a wizard or other target with plentiful ranged attacks who would come forward because they'd shoot you with something if an opportunity presented itself. Can anyone come up with a sensible scenario for them? Running up at the...

Well, it is an interesting tactic. However, you have to take a defender class to do that, AND you prevent your actual defender from marking that target. It's quite possible that will lead that target to attacking your wizard or another soft target instead of the tank. Yes, the bad guy will...

Yes, the to-hit isn't that different than before. You get to miss out on about +3 to +5 to hit (and a lot to damage) since there are no ability score increasers. That does get significant. It isn't nearly as bad as the massive amounts of AC magical items granted in 3.X, because that was...

1. Why would you pick the same power? 2. You don't have to engage with a melee attack as far as I read it. Just keep using Dire Radiance. However, be well aware that this tactic diminishes your ability to be an effective Defender. Since you are dealing damage to the target if he attacks...

Oh, I guess it does work just like that. I just looked over the rules. Kind of odd. B readies to fire when A shoots. A shoots B shoots (and B's initiative is just before A) B shoots A's turn It seems strange, but I like it. It gives you an advantage if you know what the enemy will do. That...

Alright, let's break that down a bit...(Edit: This isn't actually how it works, see my post below). B readies an action to shoot A when A shoots A is about to shoot B shoots A shoots B's turn again How do you get two shots in a row? (That said, I see the point in readying an action to fire...

I don't follow where you are getting that.

How could no one notice that? Was the Paladin not marking his main target? Their powers are decently distinct, though there are some overlaps. Seems like a biased test for one. I am surprised some of them weren't easy to figure out. Naturally they would be some overlaps between 3 melee...

I'd say only the first follows RAW. The 2nd is overpowered and abuses the spirit of the rules (and it is against the rules themselves). The third, however, is the same amount of area as the first, is a more fair representation of a rotated square regarding area, and is good enough to be in...

Allowing cones and angled blasts would enable non-friendly fire AoE to be used against a flanked target without hitting your friends. With blasts and bursts that's a huge difference.

What's missing? I don't see it. Sure it doesn't have some atrocious mechanics like 3E had (such as with crafting), but that's good, not bad.