Search results

Im pretty much with you. Seems redundant to do things this way, though I might add to your design a limit to which you can up level it (say at most a level 5 spell). I think this idea of spell scaling by up-leveling is one of the best features they have come up with to date and Im hoping that...

I am also wondering whether we are ever going to see a two hander fighter. With the damage bonus's being flat (i.e. not influenced by weapon choice) the sword and board would be doing (approx) 2 points less per hit when damage is in the 30-40 scale, and for that he gets 2 equipment magical...

and I would never advocate taking that away. When I put forward this idea, I was not trying to say that the rogue was the only one that could improvise, just that he had extra tricks for getting it done. I have one guy I play with and he was really flat on 4e. He is the one whom always tries...

Im with what you are saying howandwhy99. I guess this is the big problem I am having with the rogue. His lack of identity. The latest revision tried to give him some combat efficacy by moving him onto the fighters little subsystem...and I couldnt help but feel that this decision took away his...

Ah, Not against people improvising. Totally for it. I just sorta see the rogue as the master of it. If, in that example, the chandalier was already there, the fighter could have cut the rope. The thing the rogue did which was special was that he *injected* the chandalier into the situation...

Entirely positive. Frankly, the only negative so far has been the negativity itself

Rogue expertise. Wow, what a storm that is causing. Im in the "I dont like rogues as fighter light" camp. Just dislike the two classes overlapping. However, I am also in the "rogues should be able to do *something* in a fight" camp. I just dont want it to be the same thing as a fighter. I want...

Ditto. (I was going to write some verbose response, but this pretty much stated my position nicely)

Be very wary. The half elven, twin striking avenger was one of the single most broken builds in the game. Even with the character having to sacrifice wisdom to make it work (it only kicked in at 11 when you could get that feat for half elves allowing them to spam the at-will). What it comes...

Wow, this thread again. I am entirely thrilled at the absence of weapon specialization. More than thrilled, ecstatic. Just hated that fighters were given the broadest selection of weapons, then told "but to be feasible, you must only be good in one!". Then there was the whole "Its a vorpal...

Granted, its a gamist example. I guess the thing I was trying to illustrate with it is that is we are going to have desperation abilities (and I think there is plenty of room for them) I like them to scream of desperation. Something you would only do as a last option, yet, if played well, saves...

verzimulinaturde? Me fail English? The unpossible. But to your point, well stated. What you have said in favor of gear as the governing meta system is well stated and argued. Kudos. However : rope. Rope? Yes rope. Rope is the item that I use to gauge how to integrate gear into any game. Why...

Excellent question. I love "pull em back from the brinks", but they have to be designed right. Ultimately it comes down to the nature of "dailies" (or other limited use mechanic) and how they are designed. You see, I hate "IWIN" dailies that you pop at the start of combat. Deplore them. So...

Spend a little time going back over the previous threads of this forum. This has come up plenty of times, So no, it isnt "one" thread. And the "its a handful of posters", we must be perceiving this differently, cause its coming across to me as more than a "handful"

Is that what fighters are? Mage bashers? Did we, in order to complete the definition of what a fighter should be, need to (via inadvertent rulings) increase his ability to resist spells? If I wanted a mage-basher fighter, I would use specialisation/feats to emulate that, not a side effect of a...

You have to think in terms of how a bonus IMRPOVES you odds instead of how it changes them. Imagine this, You need an 11 to hit. Thats a 50% chance he misses Now, you attack get s bless spell granting him a +1 to hit. But think of it in terms of the chance you miss reducing from 50% to 45%...

Pretty much where I am at with this. I just cant see how siloing prevents concept. You want a sage, make a sage. Your emphasis is on knowledge and its ability to solve problems, great. You can achieve that with OR without siloing. Not excited about the combat aspects, then play it...

Ironically, you mention 2d10 having a bell curve. There has been ALOT of threads which have discussed 1d20, and that when you start thinking of it in terms of improvement and what a +X represents at the high and low ends of the probability spectrum, it turns out that d20 actually has a hideous...

I always thought it was current too (me bad read not too good). My position is one of agreeing with you. I like that spells are finishers rather than openers too. Fantastic Goal. I just dont like that Hit points are the mechanism they measure this with. I just havent heard a good argument (by...

No, your not a heretic, I feel the same way. One day (when we were still playing 4e) I went into the site to search for feats and it came back with a list more than 3000 long...something went wrong there. Players just lost interest in looking them up just due to the ridiculous glut. They didnt...