Recent content by Khanedur

Its not so much that you are balancing across two damage types as you are making up for the fact that casters have many damage types but weapon users have one (descriptor "weapon") An analogy would be if you had to purchase a fighter damage feat that only applied to stances instead of all of...

I like them. I especially like that we have workable approximations of stone/earth shape now. Call me crazy, but I miss the terrain altering spells.

What you are saying about AoE's are true for the wizard. But less so for the warlock or the cleric. In fact. Looking over the warlock's first few levels, he has significantly less multiple target potential than the ranger. And the ranger has access to weapon focus feats for her attacks.

Added damage being rare would be fine. But added damage costing as much as it does for conditional bonuses borders on being a trap. And no, I don't think that giving casters a true weapon focus feat for their implements fixes the sameness of a lot of their powers and feats. That issue goes too...

Actually, that was one of my points from the original post. Not only does it become a virtual auto-hit by targeting fort. The attack against the weak defense is also the one that hits like a freight train. It may be per encounter, but how many times do you need to hit a PC with a power like...

I just reread the feats and you are right. How incredibly disappointing.

I know that the NPC and PC math aren't supposed to match. But I haven't had a chance to see how a party feels against, say, fire giants instead of bodak reavers. (both level 18 monsters, one has vs ac attacks, the other also has vs fort). Has anyone else? Or with a different set of monsters...

To underfoot: Its not game balance that I worry about. Honestly I think that in the name of balance a lot of the game has been beaten into homogeneity. But that's not the point. My problem is that the feats require a tremendous resource drain in both feats and ability score points that martial...

I'm sorry if that was confusing. I didn't mean to imply all implement, but rather as a placeholder for any individual implement type. So it would be weapon focus (rod) and so forth.

So from what I can tell Astral fire Burning Blizzard Dark fury and all their kind are just Weapon focus for spells, but with added suck. For instance Why should spellcasters have to spend attributes in non primary stats to get a damage bonus when melee characters don't? And why should they...

Hi guys, I have had a great deal of trouble trying to make a character that has an average Non AC defense that is 2 less than his AC (without shortchanging the AC of course) Is this intentional? Do we have an explanation for this? I just feel that with all of the vs ref and vs fort powers that...

Actually, you can boost your static damage with reaping strike within the rules. Hammers Rhythm and Scimitar's Dance would likely give you better than a +2 when you hit 11th level. And while there is nothing you can do at epic to enhance that, I don't think its intentional but rather a simple...

I'm pleased over all. Yes, many the powers do seem a bit generic. But how many new ideas do you expect out of a list of combat spells? "Use your enemies to determine flanking" I think that's a first. And an encounter power that lasts for the encounter (IE illusory wall) is pretty new. I just...

The debate is the gift of alignment Saying that you cant define chaotic good is a cop-out, no one ever has the last word on morality. Merely suggesting that be out there is what was important. I'm so glad that the alignment system existed so we can have this debate. I value the ways in which...

Thanks guys, I knew I'd get some good reading out of this thread. You reminded me of a lot, and now I've got a list to take to the bookstore as well. VannATLC, the things you mention are why I think altered carbon is a really good example of D&D resurrection handled well. Its expensive, so not...