Search results

Cool. That makes total sense, and is pretty much what I was thinking, but wanted to make sure since it so rarely came up.

Okay, so a bit of an odd situation that as a practical matter probably won't come up all that often, but I wanted to run it by y'all anyway. A monster has a an attack power that says something like "Frenzy: Effect: The monster makes two claw attacks." The attacks can be against the same...

I could maybe see them as a controller off leader. I think I would actually prefer them as another melee controller rather than another melee leader. After all, we already have (Warlord, warpriest, Str. Cleric, Bard, Ardent and Runepriest) to cover the melee leader role.

Unfortunately the old adage of "You can please some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all the people all the time." definitely holds true here. There are those who are excited by essentials, there are those who hate essentials. I know...

The other thing to do as well is, assuming your DM tells you the actual roll (i.e. "does 40 hit your AC?") record how close the hit was. If you are hit by one a lot then upping your defense should help. If the DM is simply throwing level 28 or 29 monsters at you (presumably using the old...

But more synergies doesn't necessarily equate to more power. Rather, it means you can do one or two things particularly well, but are likely not as good at others. A wizard can become pretty darn good with psychic powers and deal a lot of damage/control. But to get exceedingly good (i.e...

To be fair, the ranger ran into an elite that action pointed and was able to land 4 of 5 attacks, including a crit. Not something that is going to come up all that often. Also, this was the party's third encounter of the day and they will have no problem (resource-wise) going through another...

Aye fair enough. The previous phase of the beta had the same issue, which I guess is why I wasn't bothered by it. Or at least I think it did. I remember chugging around on it for a few minutes then realizing it was far easier to build a monster on the old builder. I just used the online one...

Indeed. Its not quite an auto-hit for him, but he does hit more often than not to be sure. Point being though, it makes for more entertaining combats in general and much of the grindy feel is going away as each turn seems to be important and there's less of a sense of inevitability.

Hmm, perhaps I misread, but I took the early announcement about the expansion of the beta to all DDi subscribers as an acknowledgement that it was still in beta (including the new monster builder). Granted the new monster builder is still nowhere near the old one, but I didn't take their...

Of course. But then, not all of the remaining 103 pages of errata not from PHB1 is dealing with player options either. Some of it is dealing with SC's, or with diseases, etc. This is exactly our point. Your argument has been that there's a definite power creep due to all these new options...

Good point UngeheuerLich. When the ranger took 114 points of damage from a single monster's first turn (putting her 1 point from death), it was really only because the monster was using the MM3 numbers. The monster was I believe (don't have my notes in front of me) 1 level below the party's...

I would hardly call 20% of the errata being in one book as a drop in the bucket. Its actually probably a little over 20% given the amount of padding in the errata document (each book starting on a fresh page). I think the 20% figure is particularly noteworthy given the "dozens" of new books...

In my experience, the grind was nothing at low heroic. Sure, the first couple of times we played, it took a bit but that was because we were learning a new system. Now, we can easily get 3, and maybe 4 encounters in during a 3.5 hour session at low-heroic. The difference is the hit points...

Heh, could make for a good story though. "You decide to hang up your pitchfork and do something important. The world more or less blows up and within a month, you've drifted off into the stars to enjoy your immortality." Or, maybe immortality isn't something to strive for after all. :p

Ah cool, so WotC promised an increased character limit by May? Sweet! :p Seriously though, my guess is that they're looking at the data to see a) how many people are actually hitting the limit and b) how many of the people that have actually hit the limit are actively using/updating those...

More to the point, one class since release of essentials is the epitome of "small sample size". I'll be honest, by and large, the essentials style "simplified" format is not for me. I much prefer having more choices in building my characters. That being said, I see no problem with having...

Thanks for quoting the HotFK. I don't have that book so wouldn't have been able to look it up. Hopefully its in Rules Compendium should it come up and I think it needs to be enforced (would be more likely I suppose if there were a Pacifist Cleric). Anyhoo, I knew the issue about needing a...

Yeah in roughly 27 levels of play covering several different groups (including a few gamedays, etc.) I think I've seen this issue come up twice. Granted, a Pacifist cleric will have it happen a little more often, but that I guess is why I might give him the choice of applying crit damage --...

I believe that is still per level. The point being, that in a given level, only 1 encounter should be more than level +1 in difficulty. (i.e. equal level encounters should be sufficiently challenging to keep the group entertained).